Venture capital shrivels 40 percent — It really is the end of the tech boom

There’s no mistaking it. The richest era of internet boom, the early part of what has been called the “greatest creation of legal wealth in the history of mankind,” has played itself out.

Today’s data, which shows that investment into U.S. venture capital firms dropped 40 percent in the first quarter, compared to a year ago, is just the latest sign.

Silicon Valley, and its great technology prowess, is now settling into a era of continued innovation, albeit with financial rewards much more modest than most of us have come to expect. At least, unless some unforeseen amazing technology trend emerges that we can’t possibly imagine right now.

The valley’s decline is only news to those who were still holding out hope — the large number of valley folks still desperately dreaming of hitting the Internet jackpot. After the big Internet bubble burst in 2000, Google emerged from the ashes, and in 2004 unleashed one of the biggest most successful IPOs in history. With hundreds of new millionaires freshly minted, these believers thought Silicon Valley was off to the races again. The hope held out through late last year — in part because Web 2.0 was a giant head-fake. YouTube entranced us with a $1.6 billion exit, and Facebook continued the seduction with a purported $15 billion valuation from Microsoft. But the financial performances of these and other Web 2.0 companies have vastly undershot initial expectations. The revival is just not coming.

Let’s look closely at the evidence. The number public companies here in Silicon Valley — ground zero for the U.S. technology juggernaut — has dropped significantly over the last decade. In fact, it has fallen for eight straight years, and stands at 261. That’s below the 315 the valley had in 1994, when the local newspaper, the San Jose Mercury News, itself a tiny semblance of its former heft, started keeping track. The overall public valuation of these companies is also atrophying. If you look at the top 150 companies in Silicon Valley, their value has dropped 32 percent for the year ending March 31, the Mercury News also reported over the weekend. And few companies have emerged to go public to change this: Only 90 IPOs happened in the valley between 2001 and 2008, compared to 331 between 1990 and 1998.

Venture capital firms are shutting up shop too (see our very long list of walking dead VC firms, just recently published), now that investors realize the goldrush era of technology prospecting is over. The latest evidence was in this morning’s data from the National Venture Capital Association and Thomson Reuters: Investors placed $4.3 billion into just 40 venture capital funds in the first quarter, down from $7.1 billion in 71 funds in the same quarter a year ago. It’s the fewest number of funds backed since 2003. (Though the year-over-year drop is smaller than the one seen during the last three months of 2008.)

True, the financial meltdown has played a role in the decline in funding and local company fortunes. But if you step back, you’ll see there really is no massive, fundamental value creation going any more like there was in computer and Internet revolutions of the 1980s and 1990s. When the valley’s best known venture capitalist John Doerr (pictured here) proclaimed during the late 1990s that the Internet was creating the greatest legal wealth in history, it was true. His firm, Kleiner Perkins, was behind scores of investments into companies that built out the Internet backbone as we know it. From server company Sun, to networking companies Siara and Cerent, to router companies like Juniper Networks, and then search giant Google — each of these companies produced billions in wealth. Kleiner made billions of dollars in profit from them. Other firms like Sequoia made billions from similar investments, such as Cisco, the big router company and in early computer companies like Apple. Entrepreneurs and employees everywhere benefited too. Everyone was winning. That’s no longer the case.

As the Internet build-out has diffused through the rest of the economy, the massive amounts of money is no longer there to be made, and we’re seeing a different kind of valley emerge. The technologist fervor here in the valley remains as strong as ever. We see entrepreneur’s starting new companies all the time, but they’re just not creating as much value as quickly as they once did. The bonanza days are over, and it’s back to eking out an honest living, smaller, cheaper bets with more modest results. We’re seeing consolidation too: Database software giant Oracle years ago saw it growth slowing significantly, but it has achieved revenue through consolidation. We’re witnessing the same in other sectors, and we’re probably see the same in digital media over the course of this year (more on that in another post). Meantime, the innovations that do happen are creating more efficiencies, sometimes sucking out value from elsewhere. The hit from 2007 was VMWare, when it led a wave of “virtualization” technology, making servers more efficient in corporate data center. That means incumbent servers are too costly, and companies like Sun are struggling. And over 2008 and this year, the innovation is on the mobile phone and in the emergence of cheaper, smaller computing devices known as netbooks.

But in both cases, the new players (Apple with the iPhone and the string of Asian netbook manufacturers) are upending existing players by driving costs down (Dell and HP, for example, which depend on existing computer sales). While Apple creates wealth for itself, which is good, the other winners are the hundreds of developers building applications for it. But their riches are distributed globally, and in much smaller amounts.

And now the number VC firms are shriveling. We’re returning to a bootstrapped model, and to hope that something dynamic will take the place of that good old Internet boom. The VC industry believes the next new thing is clean technology. That may be the case. There’s a trillion dollar energy market that is ripe for disruption. You’re seeing government policies helping encourage investment in alternative energy. Solar companies, new electric car companies, and wind and other efficiency-related companies are proliferating. But for now, the sort of localized massive wealth creation we saw in the 1990s just isn’t coming back, and we’ll just have to get over it.

Next Story: Schooner joins the flash memory battle
Previous Story: Quantcast introduces new online ad service to find new audiences for marketers

Bookmark and Share
Photo of Matt Marshall

About the Author, Matt Marshall

Matt Marshall is editor and CEO of VentureBeat. Follow him on Twitter at @mmarshall, and follow VentureBeat on Twitter at @venturebeat.

  • Peter Antypas
    I wouldn't necessarily call this the "end of the tech boom". Maybe the end of the second tech bubble? Technology will remain very relevant but the scale of investment we need cannot be met by private funds alone. I see an increased role for government and public/private initiatives. Cleantech isn't software. It takes substantial R&D, the barriers to entry are enormous, and the payback period is far longer than what most VCs can tolerate.
  • Chicago Not the Valley!
    Good. Lazy, bloated, sons of their more successful fathers, uninspired.

    All excellent words to describe VCs.

    The next group should not come from the Valley. Too limited in their vision. Too narrow minded. Too white.

    Take a page from the Obama election. Smarter money from more diverse sources.

    Burn the Valley down until it becomes a Ghost Town!

    F You Valley.
  • fenghua
    IMHO, 2000-2010 is a decade of innovation desert

    There is no innovation with big impact coming out of this decade. Only "innovation" we can talk about is Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc. These are laughable comparing to
    -- Internet & Cell Phone in (1990-2000),
    -- PC (1980-1990)
    -- Integrated Circuit (1970-1980),
    -- Semiconductor( 1960-1970) .

    This lack of fundamental tech breakthrough partially explains
    -- why US economy is in trouble,
    -- why Silicon valley is in deep trouble,
    -- Why it has been a very difficult decade for startups
    (We could not name a few successful startups for the decade.).

    I wish that 2010-2020 will be better.

    (Note: Google and VmWare went IPO this decade, but they were innovation of (1990-2000)) .
  • Think Again
    All because of Bush!
  • JBthere
    That's the stupidest comment I've read in a long time. Probably as stupid as Al Gore saying he invented the Internet.
  • Mr. Bush and his policies must accept a good portion of blame for the present situation. Non enforcement of the Law by SEC and many other wonderful things that should have been done by Government, did not occur under his administration. That's his administration's fault. Period! along with WMD that did not exist. Unrestrained capitalism is the bunk, and not following accepted legal principles or winking at non-enforcement is criminal.

    However, it does no good to recriminate. We are here and how do we get out? What will make us get our corporations financed, where are the inovations coming from without capital? and who gets to decide what gets funded and why?
  • Please to be making distinction between "industry boom" and "VC boom". What you're describing here is a problem with the way investments are made, not the way businesses are run or the overall worth of technology.

    @fenghua Innovation is a means to an end, not an end in itself.
  • Matt Marshall
    No, I'm talking about both. There's a problem with the away investments are made (you don't need to invest such large amounts of cash, but you may not get such large returns). And technology innovation continues, as I wrote in the piece -- but it's just not creating such significant wealth. I add more below.
  • SVTech
    Yes, we are seeing companies be able to get financing without selling their souls to VCs. People that have made money off startup success are able to re-invest their money into new companies (a lot of times their own). More power to them and with opensource technology, the costs to get startups developing is much less. How can you possibly say that technology will no longer boom? How many people read this from an iPhone, twitter, facebook, digg...
  • An excellent article and from my experience is exactly what is happening. The VCs have grown up on a diet of 100X returns and now have to confront a different reality. This will apply both to their new tech investments as well as any energy investments - which because they are "real" simply will not produce the massive payoffs of the past. The returns can still be good they just wont be at the level of the 90s.
  • Matt Marshall
    SVTech,

    I don't think I said technology will no longer progress. But the wealth we expected to come from the likes of Facebook and Digg just isn't coming as quickly as we expected.

    I mentioned iPhone in the piece as an example of continued technology innovation.

    But where's the significant wealth creation in all this? Digg, you'll recall was hyped to be worth more than $200 million in 2006. But in 2008, suddenly its investors only valued it at $164 million. And that was before the latest downturn, which probably trims its perceived market value by at least half. (http://venturebeat.com/2008/11/06/why-hasnt-dig...). It just didn't pan out like a lot of us thought it would. I was regretting that I didn't mention Twitter in the sstory, and you rightfully call me on it. But that's a really cool technology, a major breakthrough in communication protocol -- but valued by its investors at probably at about $1 billion, according to what we're hearing. It's just starting to make money. But let's give it the benefit of the doubt. Let's say it gets bought for a massive $3 billion. That still pales to the regular multi-billion dollar deals that were being done at a regular pace a decade ago.
  • radgan
    One needs to differentiate between technology cycles and investing cycles. The reality is that the tech financial bubble burst in 2000 and never came back. Venture investing while it slowed down in 2001 -2003, picked up again in 2004 with the IPO's of Google and Salesforce.com. However outside of a short window in 2005-2007 where there were significant venture IPO (Riverbed, Netscreen, Data Domain, Aruba, Netezza, Isilon, etc), the exit window has shut down and subsequently you are going to see venture investments do down also. The reality is that a huge number of venture backed startups are not going to see meaningful exits. While everyone in the industry intuitively understands that, we choose to live in Lake Wobegon where all our startups are above average and every venture fund is a top decile fund. The technologists however will continue to innovate and we will see a major new wave of innovation happen around cloud computing and virtualization that will create very meaningful new companies. I remember reading in 1994 about the death of the valley and how all the big plays are done. The press loves writing obituaries but history has shown that it never pays to bet against human ingenuity and whereelse but Silicon Valley do you have this much human talent.
  • Well said, Venky. I'm similarly positive about the long-term prospects for the valley.
  • DarrylSJ
    This has nailed it. The coming VC need to move on and focus elsewhere. The problem is that all of the easy dollars have been made. The dark secret is that INTERNET was EASY. A bunch of college students in PJ could create a billion dollars in value overnight. GREEN TECH is HARD.
  • AZAM
    Silicon Valley (in 80s to 90s ) experienced a time were information entered the digital age was unprecedented. We moved from heavy manufacturing industry to more information intensive economy. I think the advent of semiconductors and software launched a large portion of the innovations and progress we are experiencing today. The telecommunication industry also progressed from analogue to digital communications making costs of communications to minimal costs. The convergence of voice, data, and video moves seamlessly through fibers. Now wireless infrastructure is being further developed to transfer ever increasing amounts of info to wherever you are located. The Internet is the most profound innovation that continually scales and evolves into sum total collective consciousness from changes from moment to moment into the future.

    I don't know how you can surpass the future unless we invent the time machine and speed up the past. Maybe teleporting ourselves would lead to interesting experience throughout time.

    I will find it very hard to come up with another Innovation that would triumph the creation of the Internet.

    The Venture Capital investment that brought the commercialization and enabled widespread distribution of tools to enhance the experience through the net and web technologies were involved in creation of the enormous amount of wealth. We are experiencing the network effects of the initial stages and iterations on top of the basic infrastructure that was developed from early stages of the Internet.

    It will be hard for the Venture Capitalist to create the same level of wealth as information is the most abundant commodity and turned into its most valuable and useful form that of knowledge.

    In fact, the creation of the Internet has brought down the costs of information and knowledge that it is becoming increasingly harder for the very same Venture Capitalist to invest large amounts of money to generate similar results.

    The only area that comes to mind will be energy to power the info and knowledge economy. I expect in a similar fashion we will be experiencing new innovations in power production that will be getting incrementally cheaper and cheaper. Hopefully sooner than later, VCs will be complaining that that can not produce the same kinds money and returns in energy as before.

    As result, we will have more information to keep our hands full and more than our individual brains can handle.
  • danNY
    maybe it is getting harder to come up with a revolutionary idea but probably quite possible to re-do existing killer apps. i remember times when yahoo was the ultimate search platform and nothing new in that particular domain was possible/expected. it also seems alot harder to generate new ideas when one is too much involved (desperate probably) with the idea of a getting rich quick and forgetting how to just have fun and be curious and play with things.