Follow 附近上门 News on &

The narrative might go something like this: A programmer invents wild new technology. She then seeks funding, submitting a proposal to In-Q-Tel. Liking the idea, the organization backs the company, likely bringing on board some of its favored ,聽and begins to quietly pressure the founder to adapt the tech in such a way that it would require 鈥β爉oral flexibility. *Insert an Aaron Sorkin-esque conclusion here.*

But, in real life, what does taking investment dollars from In-Q-Tel mean for a company? And how much influence does the organization have in its portfolio companies?

The Government鈥檚 VC Arm Spreads Its Wings

Before tackling those questions directly, it鈥檚 worth adding some context.

Once the exclusive asset of the CIA, In-Q-Tel, the government-backed venture capital arm, has taken on new partners including the DHS, FBI, NSA, and others. Since the organization鈥檚 , has made , according to 附近上门, helping the firm maintain its intelligence community鈥檚 ability to stay on the bleeding edge of tech.

But unlike many of the CIA and its partners鈥� secret initiatives, In-Q-Tel is a nonprofit organization. As such, it is required to file a trove of financial information with the IRS. So let鈥檚 take a quick look at what they can and can鈥檛 tell us.

Intelligence Courtesy Of The IRS

While the public tax documents raise many more questions than they answer, some insight can be found.

Regardless of the organization鈥檚 tight-lipped stance towards the press, by all accounts, In-Q-Tel is thriving. During 2014, its executives managed $327 million in net assets, up from $254 million at the beginning of its 2014 fiscal year, according to the latest .

It also shells out big money for executive salaries. , CEO and president of nQTl earns a cool $1.5 million annually plus $276,000 in 鈥渙ther compensation from the organization and related organizations.鈥�

Curiously, In-Q-Tel also holds about $120 million in 鈥減ublicly traded securities,鈥� which is hard to explain given the company鈥檚 startup and VC focus. But most of its investments 鈥斅�$132 million 鈥� are , a common security startups issue.

Revenue appears to swing wildly, however, which is somewhat typical of VC investing. Government grants 鈥� about $93 million in 2014 up from $84 million the year earlier 鈥斅燼ccount for a significant chunk of In-Q-Tel鈥檚 revenue. But, in 2014, In-Q-Tel lost $2 million from investments, compared to the prior year when the organization raked in $46 million. By way of comparison, In-Q-Tel鈥檚 haul was $5 million in 2012.

An In-Q-Tel spokeswoman declined to comment on certain investment activities, specific investments, and their goals.

Money Isn鈥檛 Everything

While the news media and its investments extensively, let鈥檚 face it: In the age of unicorns 鈥� startups valued at over $1 billion 鈥斅燼nd billion-dollar fundraising rounds, $93 million in government grants means In-Q-Tel is a small fish in a big ocean. So what impact has it had and what does it mean for a founder to take the CIA鈥檚 鈥斅燼nd now its partners 鈥� money?

So we put the question of the CIA鈥檚 influence to just over 20 of In-Q-Tel鈥檚 investments, some of which . Many did not respond, a few declined to comment, but a few answered our questions directly about the intelligence community鈥檚 interest and influence in their company.

Here鈥檚 what we asked: 鈥淲hat impact has its requests as a shareholder had on your research and development roadmap? And the same question for your strategic roadmap?鈥�

Of the 23 companies asked, (we gave them more than a week). Those聽startups who did not comment include:

Here鈥檚 what the other seven said about their relation to In-Q-Tel.

, Cloud Security

鈥淥ur relationship with In-Q-Tel has been critical in helping to ensure that our product roadmap and development efforts are in alignment with the needs of the IC community. While we work closely with our commercial customers to ensure that we have prioritized their needs, it is more challenging to get that level of interaction with some government agencies because of the nature of the programs. In-Q-Tel helps to bridge that gap.鈥�

, Nanotech

鈥淲e have a work program as part of the In-Q-Tel investment, as is typically the case. Through In-Q-Tel, we’ve deepened existing relationships and formed new ones in the Defense and Intelligence Community,鈥� wrote Craig Weich, vice president business development. 鈥淥ther than that, I’m not sure that there’s anything that we would say at this time regarding impact on our R&D or strategic roadmaps.鈥�

, Big Data

鈥淚n-Q-Tel has unique insight into the needs of the IC and broader federal sector and so has been an excellent partner and source of feedback as we develop our product and GTM strategy,鈥� wrote CEO Todd Mostak. 鈥淭hey have always taken a very collaborative approach to working with MapD, and there is a high degree of synergy around the shared goal of accelerating federal adoption of GPU-powered analytics.鈥�

, Location-based Data

鈥淲e are an IQT portfolio company and have successfully graduated their work programs,鈥� wrote CEO Andy Dearing. 鈥淚n the work programs, we worked closely with IQT and their partners to ultimately build value added capabilities that would enable IQT’s partners to more easily adopt our technology. IQT has been a great partner and investor and their insights, as being a part of our Board observers, has given us a solid foundation for future growth and adding shareholder value.鈥�

Kasey Smart Technical Support Engineer wrote: “In In-Q-Tel鈥檚 [IQT] case, I can mentioned that their requests aided us in the development of the Voxel8 Developer’s Kit 3D Printer. IQT was interested in specific capabilities that we provided through the DK units, and their funding aided us in bringing this product to market. As you may have noticed, we have since discontinued the DK (due to further development), and I cannot comment on current IQT relations.鈥�

, Threat Intelligence Powered By ML

鈥淪o to answer your question: we’re super positive on In-Q-Tel – they’ve been a great partner for us – both with Recorded Future and earlier companies. I have personally worked with them for probably soon 12-13 years and the approach and team at In-Q-Tel is stellar. The actual product programs are run in a very smart way to benefit both the end customer as well as the company in itself – i.e. you don’t get asked to build weird stuff that is never used outside very niche cases,鈥� wrote Christopher Ahlberg, CEO.

Everyone Has Secrets

Much like In-Q-Tel itself, and its clandestine government benefactors 鈥� the CIA, and others 鈥� most of the companies we asked about the CIA鈥檚 influence were tight-lipped about their relationship with In-Q-Tel. Even those that did respond offered carefully crafted written statements that, in many cases, shed little light on how the nation鈥檚 defense agencies influence what and how technology is developed.

However, it鈥檚 clear the program has been successful enough to spur other nations, , to develop spy-backed VC operations of their own. But don鈥檛 expect much more information about In-Q-Tel in the future.

滨濒濒耻蝉迟谤补迟颈辞苍:听

But, the drama has been Tony-worthy at India e-commerce startup Flipkart, amid high-profile executive departures 鈥� for example 鈥� and a in January. The company has a massive fundraising round in April with eBay, Microsoft, and Chinese tech-giant Tencent, all kicking in for the fresh round of financing.

The three companies agreed to invest $1.4 billion in India e-tail startup Flipkart, at an $11.6 billion valuation. As a part of the deal, eBay siphoned off its nascent India unit to Flipkart and arranged a partnership deal. But not everyone agrees on the $11 billion valuation. More on that later.

India E-commerce Set to Surge

Though data on market share is difficult to come by, Alibaba-backed Paytm, Amazon.com, Flipkart, and Snapdeal 鈥� also an eBay investment 鈥� are vying for market share. Thus far, suggest Amazon and Flipkart are neck-and-neck as leaders, with Snapdeal, which eBay has also invested in, a distant third.

The reasons why e-commerce giants are eyeing the Indian market, to begin with, are clear enough. After the US, China is the largest potential market, but it鈥檚 difficult to conquer. India is a close third.

With a population of 1.3 billion, and only 2.5 percent of all retail shopping occurring online, there is the potential for significant growth, Morgan Stanley 聽online sales to hit $100 billion by 2020.

By contrast, in 2016, US e-commerce retail sales were more than $389 billion, according to a May Commerce Department . Year-over-year growth hovers around 15 percent, about 8.5 percent of retail sales in the US occurs online, which inches upward each quarter.

But sales growth isn鈥檛 the whole story. Unlike the US, where about 75 percent of the population has internet access, in India that number is much lower 鈥� 19 percent, to a KPMG report. Of those people with internet access, a mere 14 percent have shopped online.

Because of the proliferation of mobile devices in India, which are set to double in two years, and the ease of purchasing items on them, which was not true even three or four years ago, it鈥檚 possible that number could as much as double to match its peer countries, according to the KPMG report.

RIP eBay India

It鈥檚 worth noting that the eBay-Flipkart deal didn鈥檛 occur in a vacuum. In the fall, it emerged that Walmart to invest $1 billion in the Indian startup but the talks have since broken down or not yet been finalized.

At the time, said a Walmart-Flipkart deal would have given the American retail giant greater access to the Indian market, which the company continues to struggle with. The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer currently operates 21 wholesales stores in India, which are not allowed to sell without a middleman, and has shelved 2013 plans to build supermarkets, citing regulatory challenges.

So Flipkart was looking for investors and may have not found the right fit. Enter eBay.

As anyone who has been following eBay closely, or not-so-closely, knows the company has been underperforming e-commerce peers such as Amazon for years.

鈥淲e expect the company to maintain its current revenue growth rate in the mid-single digits with share buybacks driving double-digit EPS growth,鈥� wrote Wedbush analyst Aaron Turner in a recent note to investors. 鈥淲hile share buybacks provide a measure of downside protection, we believe upside potential for shares will be limited until [the] company can exhibit sustainable volume growth acceleration.鈥�

Translation: share buybacks are great for the bottom line, but the company has to figure out how to grow the top line too.

EBay has been taking several steps to do so as . It has invested in developing a to its 鈥� with the arcane title 鈥渟tructured data鈥� 鈥� and, as we now know, looking into e-commerce in India.

As CEO Devin Wenig described in a recent , the e-commerce company has been evaluating options in the Indian market for almost a year. Executives decided that spinning-off its India unit, investing $500 million in Flipkart, and making an exclusive partnership deal was, for the moment, a better idea than continuing to go it alone.

鈥淔lipkart had a very strong close to last year and they are starting to pull away,鈥� Wenig said. 鈥淪o if we are serious about the market, I want to invest in 鈥� and be partners with 鈥� those that are going to win. The conclusion was there weren鈥檛 going to be 10 winners, but maybe only one or two. And Flipkart 鈥� given all of that 鈥� was the natural party to align with.鈥�

Despite Wenig鈥檚 assessment of eBay鈥檚 opportunities in India, what鈥檚 less clear is whether the move was due to a belief that the company needed to reposition itself against the deep-pocked, Amazon, which been has been active in India since at least 2013.

It鈥檚 possible eBay鈥檚 move was a strategic pull-back, like Uber鈥檚 decision to get out of China, which was due to the company鈥檚 mounting losses, for little gain in market share. It also took a stake in its China-based rival.

to a report published in April, the underlying reason may be the latter 鈥� that eBay has failed to understand the Indian market since it entered the country 13 years ago. An anonymous senior executive told The Hindu Business Line that up until 2016, eBay had invested about $250 million in India.

EBay, the sources said, also endured management changes, as well as an inability to innovate for the Indian market.

鈥淚t was trying to do things in India that it did globally, but the playbook was not working at all,鈥� an anonymous India official Business Line.

Flipkart鈥檚 Valuation

What鈥檚 less clear is whether Flipkart鈥檚 business is stable in the long run. As stable executive teams often beget stable growth, Flipkart has been unable to go several months without a high profile departure, or some other form of shakeup.

Lastly, as promised, it’s worth thinking about how the smart money values the Indian startup. At this point, its shares 鈥� which are privately held 鈥� . Investors, some of who include mutual funds such as the Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund, and the Vanguard Variable Insurance Fund can鈥檛 agree on what the company鈥� is worth. In January, for example, Fidelity Investments marked down its shares, and valued the company at $5.58 billion, and three months later eBay shelled out at an $11.6 billion valuation.

Even if that $11.6 billion value is accurate, and some market event more than doubled its share price, it鈥檚 off from its $15 billion June, 2015 value assigned by Morgan Stanley. That鈥檚 still a two-bagger for the big bank, a feather in its cap if it can get out at the right time. Yet, Morgan Stanley has been marking down its valuation, slashing Flipkarts value for five consecutive quarters.

But, one thing investors that must disclose valuations to the public agreed on: The company wasn鈥檛 worth what many of them bought-in at, and it is now faring worse than NASDAQ.