Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Y! Alert: TechCrunch

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from TechCrunch

Cook And Patzer On Intuit's Growth, The Payment Graph, And Product Focus Top
Last night I caught up with Intuit founder Scott Cook and Aaron Patzer, the founder of Mint who know runs Intuit’s personal finance group. I whipped out my iPhone and did an impromptu interview. Cook and Patzer talk about where growth is coming from at Intuit, how it tries to encourage entrepreneurism, and the “payment graph.” Cook is really excited about SnapTax, the TurboTax iPhone app that lets people do their taxes by snapping a picture of their W-2 forms. The same OCR technology will soon be baked into the company’s upcoming GoPayment apps for accepting checks via photo. Patzer came into Intuit through the $170 million acquisition of Mint . Cook knows the value of injecting entrepreneurial DNA into the larger organization, and he tries to foster that spirit throughout Intuit. Since Intuit bought Mint, it’s kept on growing from 1.7 million to 5.6 million users, and gradually it is being connected with hooks into Intuit’s more established products like TurboTax and Quicken. Off camera I asked why doesn’t QuickBooks offer a similar service to help businesses visualize and organize their expenses like Profitably does with QuickBook’s APIs, and Patzer agreed, “That is something that should be in QuickBooks.” (That is just his opinion, he doesn’t run QuickBooks). In the video, Patzer imagines a Mint-like service which suggests deals on business services to QuickBooks users. Patzer goes beyond that and talks about the idea of a payment graph which tracks relationships between businesses and how much they are paying each other. Before the video, he told me: “People talk a lot about the social graph and interest graph. One third of the economy goes through QuickBooks in terms of businesses invoicing other businesses. Each invoice contains a connection between vendors, suppliers, and customers, and also the price of that connection. Representing the payment graph is huge opportunity and something no other company can do.” At it’s core that is a very interesting idea—to map out business relationships based on payments, with the strength of each tie determined by the flow of money either way. I wonder if it would look anything like social influence graphs that look at who retweets and @replies whom. It is clear that Intuit is still extremely product focussed. I asked Cook what is more important to nail down first, the product or the business model. For Cook, product always comes first: “If you don’t have delighted customers, stop. Don’t go there.” CrunchBase Information Intuit Scott Cook Aaron Patzer Information provided by CrunchBase
 
Microsoft's Chief Marketer Steps Down After 22 Years Top
Microsoft has had its share of executive departures lately. The latest one to exit the software giant is Mich Mathews , senior vice president for Microsoft’s Central Marketing Group and one out of only two women on the company’s senior leadership team , reports AdAge . Here’s why this is rather big news: Mathews has been with Microsoft for 22 years and currently oversees more than $1 billion in ad spending and marketing efforts for consumer brands such as Windows, Bing and Xbox. According to AdAge, who spoke with Mathews about the news, she announced her retirement last night to company execs after making a decision to leave the software company over the Christmas holidays. Mathews started working with Microsoft in 1989, and for nearly four years worked with Microsoft as a consultant in the UK before switching to a full-time role in 1993. By 1999, she was named an officer of the company, and rose all the way to the top. She will now be helping Microsoft COO Kevin Turner , to whom she reports, and chief executive Steve Ballmer find someone to replace her when she steps down next Summer. Mathews reportedly plans to take a break and then start ‘chapter two’ of her career, although she doesn’t have a new job lined up yet. This isn’t exactly the first high-profile departure at Microsoft in recent times. Microsoft also lost Bob Muglia , the president of its server and tools business, chief software architect Ray Ozzie , the head of its business division Stephen Elop and both J. Allard and Robbie Bach , who headed its Entertainment and Devices Division. CrunchBase Information Microsoft Information provided by CrunchBase
 
Japan's SoftBank To Offer Free Phones, Waive All Communication Fees For Quake Orphans Top
Japan’s telecommunications juggernaut SoftBank , the third largest mobile carrier of the country, had to register quite a lot of damage after the big earthquake that hit Japan on March 11. 3,800 of SoftBank’s base stations were knocked out, meaning no customer in the affected areas could make or receive calls via cell phones (the situation was similar with other carriers). But it turned out that this damage wasn’t the main concern of SoftBank’s president and founder Masayoshi Son (pictured above). After visiting Fukushima Governor Yuhei Sato in his prefecture on March 22 and seeing the real damage done, Son promised his company will offer free cell phones to all children who became orphans due to the earthquake. Read More
 
The History Of Internet Usage And Speeds (Infographic) Top
Not a fan of infographics ? Be gone! For I felt compelled to share with you this infographic made by the folks over at Webhostingbuzz , visually showing how fast the Internet has made its way to the people of this world in the past 15 years – and how fast the Internet has become in some parts of it. Here’s what stood out for me: the United States leads the world in broadband penetration, with Americans consuming way more gigabytes per month than Europeans or people in Japan and South Korea. The United States only ranks 30th when it comes to downloads speeds, however, thus trailing countries like South Korea, Latvia, Andorra and the Republic of Moldova. Surprisingly, downloads speeds in the US still surpass those in the UK, Canada, Australia and Israel.
 
9 Women Can't Make a Baby in a Month Top
Editor's Note: This is a guest post by Mark Suster ( @msuster ) a VC at  GRP Partners . He blogs at  BothSidesoftheTable I’m a very big proponent of the “lean startup movement” as espoused by Steve Blank & Eric Ries . The part of the movement that resonates the most with me (in my words) is that entrepreneurs should keep their capital expenditures really low while they’re experimenting with their product and determining whether there is a large market for what they do. In the initial phases of any new market you’re developing a product (hopefully with a minimal set of features), getting feedback from customers, refining your product based on user feedback and then re-launching your product. Rinse & repeat. Nobody really knows whether or not the idea is yet going to be big, so I believe in not over capitalizing too early. This benefits you, the entrepreneur. It’s the whole basis of my investment philosophy, which I call “ The Entrepreneur Thesis .” I believe that over capitalizing companies too early often favors the VC. It takes options off of the table. It produces only one kind of outcome. It drives perverse incentives.  If you’re creating truly innovative products, you often have no idea whether the proverbial dog will eat the dog food. You have a hunch. Testing is what helps determine whether you’re really on to something. In the late 90′s I saw a dangerous trend creeping into the startup world, which was that companies were suddenly raising huge amounts of money too early in their existence. It seemed to be purely speculative. It’s not clear that there was big customer demand for some of these products yet entrepreneurs were egged on by VCs to “take the money” and try and push the market. I was a victim of this kind of thinking. “If my competitors have raised $40 million then I need to in order to keep up.” This is total bullshit. Here’s what those VCs (and us entrepreneurs, myself included) didn’t understand: 9 women can’t make a baby in a month . Markets develop for a complex set of factors that are often beyond all of our control. It is often the fortuitous mixture of new technologies, customer awareness and then acceptance of the technology and then the slow adoption into our daily lives that leads to markets exploding. Often the timing of this is luck. And one of my favorite sayings is that “being too early in a market is the same thing as being wrong.” Throwing more money to speed up market adoption very seldom produces results. Yet it tempts us all. And it seems to be creeping back into startup culture of late in a worrying way. Great product ideas (and even potentially great companies) are being thrust at us in an attempt to go more quickly.  I recently read this anecdote in the press (I won’t mention the company name because I actually really love the concept, but it’s not too hard to figure out). Talking about whether to raise more money or not, their VC allegedly said to them: “If you had more capital, could you get to the future faster?  Will (many more) millions help you get five years into one?” 9 women. Baby. Month. You can’t get 5 years into one. That’s falling prey to the “ mythical man month ” line of thinking. Over funding often produces bad behavior in early-stage companies. You hire people too fast, you over build your products, you try to force market adoption and you do PR blitzes before your product is really ready for prime time. And having too much money certainly raises board expectations that you will do big things quickly. No board is going to give you $25 million up front and then expect your year-one staff expenditures to be $2 million. I would argue that the father of the lean startup movement might actually be Bill Gross as he talked about in this interview I did with him on “ why your company needs to be 10x better than your competitors to win ” in your market. And I believe that strength of the  Y Combinator movement in America has been exactly this: take incredibly talented technologist who have a passion for an idea, let them launch it and let’s see what they produce and what the market reaction to this product will be. It’s interesting to me that two of the most talented tech leaders of our era – Bill Gross & Paul Graham – have both opted for a model of incubation to encourage young tech entrepreneurs to build disruptive businesses. The moment that you have a product that seems to satisfy the needs of a large enough market you enter what startup people like to call “product / market fit” characterized by the rapid acceleration of customer demand and therefore adoption. This is the so-called “tipping point.”  It is at this point that your startup needs to consider “ going fat .” In fact, not going fat at this stage can also cause problems. Once you’ve woken up the sleeping lions (e.g. Facebook, Google) to a large market opportunity then you had better have enough resources to compete. Some of the best new companies of the past several years seem to stay lean until they figure out their product / market fit. Twitter took a few years until people (or the company) really understood how to use it effectively. I’d hate to see what Twitter would have become if they had started with $50 million. Quora is one of the better designed new products of the past few years in my opinion. And they seem to have been going really slow in building out the team and you certainly don’t see a ton of too-early PR blitzes from them. Those of us that espouse “lean startups” often do so from personal experience. We made mistakes ourselves that proved to us that you can’t make markets move faster than they inherently want to just by throwing more resources at them. Those of us that are willing to admit that we fawked things up in the first dot-com explosion and learned from our mistakes have the battle wounds to make more pragmatic decisions in 2011. It is encapsulated in one of my favorite quotes that I first heard from Bruce Dunlevie of Benchmark Captial , “Good judgment comes from experience, but experience comes from bad judgment” I loved the quote so much I wrote an entire blog post on the topic . That’s why when you hear Steve Blank talk about lean startups you can hear his experiences ooze out of him in real-life examples of 8 startups. He knows that in the earliest phases of your businesses you’re trying to discover whether there is actually a large market for your product. If you’re a startup or product person and haven’t read his book Four Steps to Epiphany please do. And let’s be clear. “9 women behavior” is not restricted to just fund raising. We technology leaders also make this mistake. I certainly did in my first company. I continually felt the market pressure to get new product releases out the door. I had my sales teams telling me we needed certain features to be competitive. I had my dev team asking for us to work through new architectural components to improve performance. I had my operations team telling me it was too hard for them to run analytics unless we built in our new BI platform. It was so tempting for me to throw extra resources at our technology debt for a couple of quarters. And that’s exactly what I did. Our lead architect argued against it. He said that they were in a tight, small, very productive team and if we left them alone he felt they could be incredibly productive. As we added more resources we added more strain on his high-calibre core team. They had to spend time training our new resources, reviewing code, refactoring where mistakes were made, attending meetings, etc.  He argued that in some cases less was more. What did he know? He was tech. I was management. He didn’t feel my pressures on sales, marketing and ops. I had built computer systems before. I had been part of large, multidisciplinary teams. So I added a third-party developer in Bulgaria to increase output on one of our products. I added a dev team in India to spearhead new initiatives and design our future UI. The former was outsourced, the latter was our own team. In the end, of course, our productivity actually suffered. It is he who first taught me this lesson. It was  Ryan Lissack , now senior director in tech at Salesforce.com. He understood “the mythical man month” long before I did.  The beauty of working with uber talented teams is that no matter how experienced you are as a leader you’re always learning from your team if you’re willing to listen. Eventually I did. And ever since then I have been reluctant to over-resource tech projects. Ever since then I have been in favor of smaller teams focused on core tasks. I have been in favor of lean development. I hope this phase of the economy – the 9 Women phase – doesn’t last too long. And I hope that entrepreneurs will have the confidence to resist VCs who are pressuring them to over-fund too early. I know how it feels when the “ siren calls ” of money. It’s tempting. Just know how the end game often plays out … ** Image courtesy of Fotolia . Check ‘em out.
 
If You Only Have Time To Read 5 Stories A Day, Let Summify Pick Them Top
As a person who consumes dozens, if not hundreds, of articles on the web each and every day, it’s easy to remember that I’m an extreme outlier. Most people would prefer to read only a few articles a day — only the ones that they know are worth their time. That’s what Summify does in a nutshell. They survey the content on the web and condense it into the articles that will interest you the most. Today marks the formal launch of Summify. After a few months in beta testing, they believe their social algorithms are ready for the world to try. And they also have a fresh round of funding to further spread the service. Here’s how Summify works: it asks you to enter at least one account you use on the web to get information. This can mean Twitter, Facebook, or Google Reader. And if you can enter two or all three, even better. Summify then analyzes your social graph and the data flowing through it to see which stories it should serve up for you. The default is to do this on a daily basis, but you can set it longer (weekly) or much shorter (every 6 hours). When the summary is returned, you’ll find a nicely laid out digest of the five or ten most important stories that you should read at that time. This includes which of your friends shared the story on Twitter and how many likes it got on Facebook. It works very well. Each of the stories served up to me were the ones that I cared about (though it did miss a few major ones I would have also liked to read). But the best part is the end of the summary which reads “that’s it, you’re done!” How refreshing. Techmeme , My6Sense , and even Google are trying different techniques when it comes to web curation, but Summify may have the most straightforward approach: these are the five to ten articles you should ready today. These digests are served to you on the web and via email. And next quarter, there will be a mobile experience as well, we’re told. “ The nature of social media is such that even the most devoted users miss more than half of what comes at them, so we started with the idea that you can’t and shouldn’t read everything — read just the good stuff which is typically what your friends and sources are talking about the most ,” is how co-founder  Mircea Paşoi explains the service. “ Obviously, we had to put a lot effort in making sure it doesn’t become a popularity contest, and I think we’ve struck the right balance of highly relevant and diverse stories, ” he continues. To help with the cause, Summify has closed a new seed round of funding from Accel Partners, Rob Glaser, Stewart Butterfield, Steve Olechowski, and Canadian super angel Boris Wertz. The amount is undisclosed and follows a smaller round from August of last year. The company is based on Vancouver, British Columbia. CrunchBase Information Summify Information provided by CrunchBase
 
Google Reaches Agreement On FTC's Accusations Of "Deceptive Privacy Practices" In Buzz Rollout Top
Google just settled with FTC over agency’s accusations of “deceptive privacy practices” in the rollout of its social communications tool Buzz. The FTC issued a release here (we’ve pasted it below) and you can also access Google’s Blog post on the subject here. Updating. Buzz, which launched last February, has been plagued with privacy issues. And the communications tool, which lives inside Gmail, has not exactly taken off. The FTC claims that Google’s “deceptive tactics” when launching Buzz (i.e. not adequately informing users of the privacy issues surrounding the product), violated the FTC act. Specifically, the FTC says that Google didn’t properly inform users of the choice of declining or leaving the social network. For users who joined the Buzz network, the controls for limiting the sharing of their personal information were confusing and difficult to find, says the FTC. The agency also claims that those who did join the network didn’t realize that the identity of individuals they emailed most frequently would be made public by default within the network. Google also offered a “Turn Off Buzz” option that did not fully remove the user from the social network. Apparently, Google received “thousands of complaints” from users who were upset and worried about the public disclosure of their email contacts which included, in some cases, ex-spouses, patients, students, employers, or competitors. Jon Leibowitz, Chairman of the FTC said in the release: “This is a tough settlement that ensures that Google will honor its commitments to consumers and build strong privacy protections into all of its operations.” The settlement bars the search giant from future privacy misrepresentations, requires it to implement a comprehensive privacy program, and calls for regular, independent privacy audits by independent third parties for the next 20 years. The charge also requires Google to obtain users’ consent before sharing their information with third parties. And the FTC says this is the first time in history where a settlement has required a company to conduct a privacy program of this kind. Google writes in its blog post announcing the settlement: We'd like to apologize again for the mistakes we made with Buzz. While today's announcement thankfully put this incident behind us, we are 100 percent focused on ensuring that our new privacy procedures effectively protect the interests of all our users going forward. The company also admitted that the launch of Google Buzz “fell short of our usual standards for transparency and user control—letting our users and Google down.” I think the question lingering in everyone’s minds is when is Google going to finally “sunset” Buzz? FTC Charges Deceptive Privacy Practices in Google’s Rollout of Its Buzz Social Network Google Agrees to Implement Comprehensive Privacy Program to Protect Consumer Data WASHINGTON, March 30, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Google Inc. has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it used deceptive tactics and violated its own privacy promises to consumers when it launched its social network, Google Buzz, in 2010. The agency alleges the practices violate the FTC Act. The proposed settlement bars the company from future privacy misrepresentations, requires it to implement a comprehensive privacy program, and calls for regular, independent privacy audits for the next 20 years. This is the first time an FTC settlement order has required a company to implement a comprehensive privacy program to protect the privacy of consumers’ information. In addition, this is the first time the FTC has alleged violations of the substantive privacy requirements of the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework, which provides a method for U.S. companies to transfer personal data lawfully from the European Union to the United States. “When companies make privacy pledges, they need to honor them,” said Jon Leibowitz, Chairman of the FTC. “This is a tough settlement that ensures that Google will honor its commitments to consumers and build strong privacy protections into all of its operations.” According to the FTC complaint, Google launched its Buzz social network through its Gmail web-based email product. Although Google led Gmail users to believe that they could choose whether or not they wanted to join the network, the options for declining or leaving the social network were ineffective. For users who joined the Buzz network, the controls for limiting the sharing of their personal information were confusing and difficult to find, the agency alleged. On the day Buzz was launched, Gmail users got a message announcing the new service and were given two options: “Sweet! Check out Buzz,” and “Nah, go to my inbox.” However, the FTC complaint alleged that some Gmail users who clicked on “Nah…” were nonetheless enrolled in certain features of the Google Buzz social network. For those Gmail users who clicked on “Sweet!,” the FTC alleges that they were not adequately informed that the identity of individuals they emailed most frequently would be made public by default. Google also offered a “Turn Off Buzz” option that did not fully remove the user from the social network. In response to the Buzz launch, Google received thousands of complaints from consumers who were concerned about public disclosure of their email contacts which included, in some cases, ex-spouses, patients, students, employers, or competitors. According to the FTC complaint, Google made certain changes to the Buzz product in response to those complaints. When Google launched Buzz, its privacy policy stated that “When you sign up for a particular service that requires registration, we ask you to provide personal information. If we use this information in a manner different than the purpose for which it was collected, then we will ask for your consent prior to such use.” The FTC complaint charges that Google violated its privacy policies by using information provided for Gmail for another purpose – social networking – without obtaining consumers’ permission in advance. The agency also alleges that by offering options like “Nah, go to my inbox,” and “Turn Off Buzz,” Google misrepresented that consumers who clicked on these options would not be enrolled in Buzz. In fact, they were enrolled in certain features of Buzz. The complaint further alleges that a screen that asked consumers enrolling in Buzz, “How do you want to appear to others?” indicated that consumers could exercise control over what personal information would be made public. The FTC charged that Google failed to disclose adequately that consumers’ frequent email contacts would become public by default. Finally, the agency alleges that Google misrepresented that it was treating personal information from the European Union in accordance with the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor privacy framework. The framework is a voluntary program administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce in consultation with the European Commission. To participate, a company must self-certify annually to the Department of Commerce that it complies with a defined set of privacy principles. The complaint alleges that Google’s assertion that it adhered to the Safe Harbor principles was false because the company failed to give consumers notice and choice before using their information for a purpose different from that for which it was collected. The proposed settlement bars Google from misrepresenting the privacy or confidentiality of individuals’ information or misrepresenting compliance with the U.S.-E.U Safe Harbor or other privacy, security, or compliance programs. The settlement requires the company to obtain users’ consent before sharing their information with third parties if Google changes its products or services in a way that results in information sharing that is contrary to any privacy promises made when the user’s information was collected. The settlement further requires Google to establish and maintain a comprehensive privacy program, and it requires that for the next 20 years, the company have audits conducted by independent third parties every two years to assess its privacy and data protection practices. Google’s data practices in connection with its launch of Google Buzz were the subject of a complaint filed with the FTC by the Electronic Privacy Information Center shortly after the service was launched. The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint and accept the consent agreement package containing the proposed consent order for public comment was 5-0, with Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch issuing a separate concurring statement. Commissioner Rosch concurs with accepting, subject to final approval, the consent order for the purpose of public comment. The reasons for his concurrence are described in the attached separate statement. The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through May 1, 2011, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit written comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section. Comments in electronic form should be submitted using the following web link: https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/googlebuzz and following the instructions on the web-based form. Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.
 
Live From London – GeeknRolla European Startup Conference #GKNR Top
Here’s the live stream from the GeeknRolla conference for European startups, organised in association with TechCrunch Europe HERE. And follow the action on twitter on the hashtag #GKNR We’ll be updating this shortly with the startups that launched today. Here’s the programme.
 
Bubble Motion Raises $10M For Social Voice Blogging Service Top
Bubble Motion, which offers a popular a Twitter-like voice blogging service in India, Japan, and Indonesia, has raised $10 million in new funding led by SingTel Innov8 with participation from Singapore's Infocomm Investments in addition to insiders Sequoia Capital, Palomar Ventures, and NGC. This brings Bubble Motion’s total funding to $45 million. Bubble Motion's Bubbly platform is a voice-blogging phone service that allows people to share status updates in their own voice with fans and followers. It essentially takes Twitter’s model and applies this to voice blogging and mobile phones. These 'bubblers' record their voice update into their phone, and their followers everywhere are notified by SMS and prompted to click and listen. The startup recently updated its platform to allow users to send notifications of newly recorded “Bubbles” to Twitter with a link to the message on Bubbly. Bubblers also send an update to Facebook friends whenever they update their Bubbly status and post text updates on the platform. Currently Bubbly has over 7 million users across 4 countries and has delivered more than 250 million bubble messages through its service. The new funding will be used to bring Bubble into new countries outside of Asia. CEO Thomas Clayton tells us the company is eying entries into Brazil and Europe. Of course entries into these markets involve partner ships with local carriers. Already Bubbly has relationships with Bharti Airtel in India, Telkomsel in Indonesia, and Globe in the Philippines. The company says SingTel brings a network of operator partners and contacts as an investor. Bubbly faces competition from Facebook and Twitter in Asian markets. But Clayton says that the voice blogging aspect of the service, and the SMS-focused technology make it an ideal communications platform in countries like India. CrunchBase Information Bubble Motion Information provided by CrunchBase
 
Jive Adds Four New Board Members as the IPO Gets Closer Top
Jive CEO Tony Zingale is finally announcing the results of a big project he’s been working on since he took over the company in 2010. It’s not an acquisition or a product release: It’s a massive upgrade to Jive’s board of directors. Joining the board are McAfee’s outgoing chairman Charles Robel, McAfee CEO (now at Intel)  Dave DeWalt , Facebook’s vice president of technical operations Jonathan Heiliger and Google’s vice president of product management Sundar Pichai . Beyond the titles, it’s an impressive array of skills. Robel has served on the audit committees of several public companies. DeWalt has been the CEO of both McAfee and Documentum selling both for a nice premium . Heiliger is responsible for delivering Facebook to 650 million users out of a cloud environment. And Pichai was in charge of the Chrome OS and Chrome Browser, amid other products at Google. Each of them also straddle the line between enterprise and consumer experience. In one swoop Jive ups its depth around corporate finance, strategic operations, scale and technology and product vision. These four join Zingale– whose already been a public company CEO twice and served on six public company boards– and Kleiner’s Ted Schlein and Sequoia’s Jim Goetz among others on the packed board. That is a board designed to make the company better, yes. But it’s also a board that sends two messages: We’re serious about building the next big enterprise software company, and we were serious when we said we were going to go public in 2011. While Zingale knew Robel and DeWalt well, recruiting all four of them has taken some work. “I could have easily chosen the route of picking dusty old executives sitting around doing nothing, but that’s not the case here,” he says, brushing my IPO speculation aside without comment like a good private company CEO planning to file. “I think companies require an unfair advantage of this kind of expertise to drive technology decisions, governance decisions and financial decisions as we pursue more M&A and make strategic decisions.” That’s right, he said M&A. Jive bought Filtrbox early last year and apparently more deals are on the horizon. “Watch this space,” Zingale said. “A couple of things are cooking.” CrunchBase Information Jive Software Information provided by CrunchBase
 
Tesla Sues BBC For Libel Claiming Top Gear Rigged Tests, BBC "will be vigorously defending" Top
Top Gear fans? Remember the episode from a few years back where the crew tried to flog the Tesla Roadster ? Yeah, it didn’t end so well for the Tesla after Clarkson started off praising the little electric supercar. The entire segment is embedded for your viewing enjoyment after the jump, but the skinny is that the Top Gear testers sort of died prematurely — a few times. The first car’s battery’s ran out only after 55 miles. Then another car’s motor overheated. When they went back to the original car, something was up with the brakes. So yeah, one of the most watched TV programs in the entire world didn’t exactly portray the Tesla Roadster favorably. Enter the libel lawsuit. Read More
 

CREATE MORE ALERTS:

Auctions - Find out when new auctions are posted

Horoscopes - Receive your daily horoscope

Music - Get the newest Album Releases, Playlists and more

News - Only the news you want, delivered!

Stocks - Stay connected to the market with price quotes and more

Weather - Get today's weather conditions




You received this email because you subscribed to Yahoo! Alerts. Use this link to unsubscribe from this alert. To change your communications preferences for other Yahoo! business lines, please visit your Marketing Preferences. To learn more about Yahoo!'s use of personal information, including the use of web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy. Yahoo! is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)