>>> US Close Dow -0.42% S&P -0.97% Nasdaq -2.22% Russell -1.42% VIX 22.03 +4.76%

Closing Stock Market Summary

The S&P 500 fell 1.0% on Wednesday, as concerns about the Fed's hawkish mindset, rising interest rates, and slower economic growth continued to pressure risk sentiment. Growth stocks paced the retreat and accounted for the underperformance of the Nasdaq Composite (-2.2%). 

The Russell 2000 struggled with a 1.4% decline while the Dow Jones Industrial Average declined just 0.4%. 

Fed Governor Brainard's (FOMC voter) hawkish expectations for monetary policy remained fresh on the market's mind, such that today's trading dynamics were awfully similar to yesterday. 

For example, interest rates hit fresh multi-year highs, which worked against the mega-caps within the S&P 500 information technology (-2.6%), consumer discretionary (-2.6%), and communication services (-2.1%) sectors for valuation reasons. The Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF (MGK 229.78, -5.89) fell 2.5%. 

In addition, investors continued to lean defensively into the utilities (+2.0%), health care (+1.6%), real estate (+1.6%), and consumer staples (+1.4%) sectors. The energy sector (+0.5%), to be fair, also landed in the green despite a 5% decline in oil prices ($96.59/bbl, -4.94, -4.9%). 

The S&P 500 fell back below its 200-day moving average (4490), but the benchmark index briefly peaked above the key technical level following the release of the FOMC Minutes for March. The minutes corroborated Ms. Brainard's concerns about inflation and the need to tighten policy more aggressively.

Participants generally agreed it would be appropriate to reduce the balance sheet by $95 billion per month (about $60 billion for Treasury securities and about $35 billion for agency MBS) and that one or more 50 basis point increases in the fed funds rate could be appropriate at future meetings. 

Treasury yields, which had backtracked from overnight highs, also saw some volatility following the FOMC Minutes. The 2-yr yield decreased two basis points to 2.49% (topped 2.60% overnight) while the 10-yr yield rose six basis points to 2.61% (topped 2.65% overnight). The U.S. Dollar Index rose 0.1% to 99.61.  

A separate story of note was in the airline industry. JetBlue Airways (JBLU 12.45, -1.19, -8.7%) proposed a $3.6 billion, or $33.00/share, cash offer for Spirit Airlines (SAVE 26.28, -0.64, -2.4%), which had previously agreed to merge with Frontier Group (ULCC 10.61, -1.31, -11.0%).

Reviewing Wednesday's economic data:

  • The weekly MBA Mortgage Applications Index fell 6.3% following a 6.8% decline in the prior week.
  • Crude oil inventories had a build of 2.42 mln barrels following a draw of 3.45 mln barrels in the prior week.

Looking ahead, investors will receive the weekly Initial and Continuing Claims report and Consumer Credit for February on Thursday.

  • Dow Jones Industrial Average -5.1% YTD
  • S&P 500 -6.0% YTD
  • Russell 2000 -10.2% YTD
  • Nasdaq Composite -11.2% YTD

FT : Facebook owner Meta targets finance with ‘Zuck Bucks’ and creator coins

Facebook owner Meta targets finance with ‘Zuck Bucks’ and creator coins

Meta has drawn up plans to introduce virtual coins, tokens and lending services to its apps, as Facebook’s parent company pursues its finance ambitions despite the collapse of a project to launch a cryptocurrency.

The company, led by chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, is seeking alternative revenue streams and new features that can attract and retain users, as popularity falls for its main social networking products such as Facebook and Instagram — a trend that threatens its $118bn-a-year ad-based business model.

Facebook’s financial arm, Meta Financial Technologies, has been exploring the creation of a virtual currency for the metaverse, which employees internally have dubbed “Zuck Bucks”, according to several people familiar with the efforts.

This is unlikely to be a cryptocurrency based on the blockchain, some of the people said. Instead, Meta is leaning towards introducing in-app tokens that would be centrally controlled by the company, similar to those used in gaming apps such as the Robux currency in popular children’s game Roblox.

According to company memos and people close to the plans, Meta is also looking into the creation of so-called “social tokens” or “reputation tokens”, which could be issued as rewards for meaningful contributions in Facebook groups, for example. Another effort is to make “creator coins” that might be associated with particular influencers on its photo-sharing app Instagram.

Meta has also been exploring more traditional financial services, with a focus on helping to provide small business loans at attractive rates, according to several people familiar with the initiative. While nothing is immediately planned, the company has previously held discussions with potential lending partners, one of the people said.

Most of the efforts are in the early stages of being discussed and could change or be dropped, although its plans to integrate non-fungible tokens, or NFTs, into its apps are more developed. Zuckerberg confirmed an earlier Financial Times report that Instagram would soon start to support NFTs.

According to one memo shared internally last week, Meta plans to launch a pilot for posting and sharing NFTs on Facebook in mid-May. This will be “quickly followed” by testing of a feature that will allow membership of Facebook groups based on NFT ownership and another for minting — a term for creating — NFTs.

NFTs may be monetised via “fees and/or ads” in the future, according to another internal document. Facebook declined to comment.

Meta lost more than $220bn from its market valuation in February on the day it revealed users were spending increasing time on newer rivals, such as short-form video app TikTok.

The company has recently sought to find other sources of revenue and support ecommerce on the platform, delving into cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology. Its Big Tech rivals, such as Google and Apple, have been more cautious about diving into the nascent space.

But the push has been plagued by setbacks and regulatory scrutiny. Earlier this year, the global cryptocurrency project that it spearheaded, Diem, was wound down and its assets sold to a Californian bank Silvergate, after US regulators refused to give the pilot the green light over monetary stability and competition concerns.

Amid internal frustrations, Meta’s financial division has suffered what one former employee described as a “mass exodus” of staff over the past six months. Its head David Marcus left at the end of last year, along with key engineers, compliance staff and nearly its entire legal team.

Those who remain are looking into how to create or support digital currencies in its metaverse — an avatar-filled virtual world that Zuckerberg hopes will eventually generate billions of dollars in commerce for digital goods and services.

Staffers are now trying to find the least regulated way to offer a digital currency, two people said, with a digital token that is not based on the blockchain emerging as the most attractive option.

It would not be the first time Facebook has introduced such a currency to its ecosystem. It launched Facebook Credits in 2009, a virtual currency that enabled users to make in-app purchases, typically in games such as FarmVille. This represented 16 per cent of revenues at the time of its initial public offering in 2012, according to Barclays, but was shut down in 2013 as it was too costly to maintain.

In a memo from late January, the new head of Meta’s finance division Stephane Kasriel wrote: “We’re making changes to our product strategy and road map . . . so we can prioritise on building for the metaverse and on what payments and financial services will look like in this digital world.” 

Kasriel, who replaced Marcus when he left the company at the end of 2021, said the company would “accelerate” investments in facilitating payments within WhatsApp and Messenger and in “helping creators monetise their activity”, for example through NFTs.

He also signalled plans to merge its wallet for Facebook Pay — its existing peer-to-peer payments system that does not use blockchain technology — with Novi, the digital currency wallet that was initially supposed to hold the Diem coin.

“The wallet will offer payments, identity and digital asset management within the [family of apps and Reality Labs, its virtual and augmented reality arm,] and over time, to other apps/sites,” he said.

Where some of Meta’s efforts are focused on digital payments, other efforts are part of broader plans to use blockchain technology to introduce more “decentralisation” across its platforms, amid a growing buzz in Silicon Valley around the so-called Web3 movement.

Web3 advocates typically seek to wield distributed ledger technology to allow users more control and ownership over their data and disintermediate Big Tech groups that typically monetise that data as part of their ad-based business models.

But Meta appears to be embracing some Web3 ideals. It is exploring whether to store data on a blockchain, how it might give users more control over their digital identity and whether their identity or accounts can be transferred to, or used across, other platforms beyond Meta’s apps, according to one planning document.

Meanwhile, its plans to reward users for credible content with “social tokens” might allow Meta to remove itself as a central content moderator and give Facebook communities more power in moderating themselves, according to the document.

Nature : What triggers severe COVID? Infected immune cells hold clues

What triggers severe COVID? Infected immune cells hold clues
SARS-CoV-2 can enter immune cells, macrophages (pictured), in the lungs, triggering a massive inflammatory response.Credit: Steve Gschmeissner/Science Photo Library
Immune cells infected with SARS-CoV-2 can trigger a massive inflammatory response that contributes to severe COVID-19, suggest two papers — one published today in Nature, and a preprint posted online on 1 April.
Since the early days of the pandemic, research has suggested that inflammation leads to significant respiratory distress and other organ damage, hallmarks of severe COVID-19. But scientists have struggled to pinpoint what triggers the inflammation.
The latest studies implicate two types of white blood cells — macrophages in the lungs, and monocytes in the blood — which, once infected with the virus, trigger the inflammation. The studies also provide conclusive evidence that the virus can infect and replicate in immune cells — and reveal how it enters those cells. Evidence of such infections has been mixed until now.
The studies offer a plausible explanation for how severe COVID-19 progresses, says Malik Peiris, a virologist at the University of Hong Kong. “I don’t think it is the only or most important pathway, but it is certainly interesting.”
Still, infected immune cells could offer a potential target for drug development, says Jian Zheng, an immunologist at the University of Iowa in Iowa City.
Overactive response
In the Nature paper1, Judy Lieberman, an immunologist at the Boston Children’s Hospital in Massachusetts, and her colleagues looked at blood samples from people with COVID-19. They found that about 6% of monocytes — ‘early responder’ immune cells that patrol the body for foreign invaders — were undergoing a type of cell death associated with inflammation, known as pyroptosis. To see that many cells dying is unusual, she says, because the body typically gets rid of dead cells quickly.
When the researchers looked at the dying cells, they found they were infected with SARS-CoV-2. They suggest the virus was probably activating inflammasomes, large molecules that trigger a cascade of inflammatory responses that ended in cell death.
The researchers also looked at another type of immune cell, macrophages, in the lungs of people who had died of COVID-19. Because macrophages collect cellular garbage, including viral debris, it has been difficult to show whether macrophages were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or just sopping up this debris. The team found that about a quarter of macrophages had activated inflammasomes, and a fraction of those had indeed been infected with the virus. Other infected lung cells, epithelium, did not display the same response.
The results align with those of the second study, posted on bioRxiv2 and yet to be peer reviewed, by Esen Sefik, an immunologist at the Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, and her colleagues. They also found that the virus could infect and replicate in macrophages in human lung cells and in a mouse model of the human immune system. The macrophages displayed the same inflammatory response described by Lieberman, and eventually died.
The team also found that giving the mice drugs that blocked inflammasomes prevented severe respiratory distress. The drugs “rescued the mice so they were not as sick”, says Sefik. This suggests that infected macrophages have a role in the pneumonia observed in people with severe COVID-19.
The macrophages’ inflammatory response could be their way of stopping SARS-CoV-2 from replicating, says study co-author Richard Flavell, an immunologist, also at Yale, and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. When inflammasomes were activated, the virus stopped replicating in the cells. But when the researchers blocked inflammasomes, the macrophages started producing infectious virus particles.
That is a “startling” finding, says Peiris, because it shows that macrophages can assist infection.
But Stanley Perlman, a virologist also at the University of Iowa, says follow-up studies will be needed to work out how important infected immune cells are in inducing severe COVID-19 compared with other possible mechanisms.
Viral entry
Both teams were also able to show how SARS-CoV-2 can enter immune cells. Researchers have been puzzled over this because the cells don’t carry many ACE2 receptors, the virus’s main entry point.
In experiments with human and mouse cells, Sefik and Flavell found that SARS-CoV-2 could get into lung macrophages through the limited number of ACE2 receptors present. But the virus was also sneaking in through another surface protein, known as the Fcγ receptor, with the help of antibodies. When the virus encountered antibodies attached to the Fcy receptor, instead of the virus being disabled, it got scooped up into the cell.
Lieberman says this is also how the virus enters monocytes, which do not have ACE2 receptors. Only monocytes with the Fcγ receptor could be infected.
But Lieberman says that not all antibodies facilitate viral entry. The team found that antibodies produced by people who received the mRNA vaccine developed by Pfizer and BioNTech did not allow monocytes to take up the virus.
That finding is reassuring, given that many people have been vaccinated with mRNA vaccines, says Peiris. But more studies are needed to understand which types of antibodies are facilitating viral uptake by monocytes, and whether vaccines that use other technologies might induce a different response.

TechCrunch : Austin emerges as a city of unicorns and tech giants

Austin emerges as a city of unicorns and tech giants

Austin made headlines in 2021 for being “the place” for startup founders and venture capitalists alike to set up shop. That’s why TechCrunch has chosen to shine a spotlight on the city with a special episode of TechCrunch Live centered on the growing startup scene in Austin, Texas.
As Austin’s skyline expands, the city continues to solidify its standing as a tech hub. And the numbers are there to back it up.
VCs invested over $5.5 billion across 412 deals in 2021, more than double the amount of capital invested in 2020, according to PitchBook data. Rounds are getting larger, too, signaling a further maturing of the market: All of the top 10 deals for Austin in 2021 amounted to $100 million or more.

Today, Austin is more than just the capital of Texas. It’s a city of unicorns and tech giants.

Attend TechCrunch Live’s City Spotlight: Austin special event! Register here. It’s free.
TechCrunch Live is a free weekly event featuring investors, founders, and startups with the goal of helping entrepreneurs build better venture-backed businesses.

Several companies surpassed a $1 billion valuation in 2021, including The Zebra, Firefly Aerospace, Abrigo, ZenBusiness and Iodine Software. SparkCognition achieved unicorn status earlier this year while ICON recently raised $185 million in a Tiger Global-led round that valued it at “nearly $2 billion.” In 2020, Tesla settled into the so-called Silicon Hills district and Oracle moved its headquarters from Silicon Valley. Austin is also home to secondary offices of many of the largest tech companies in the world, including Google, Apple, Oracle, Amazon, Facebook and SpaceX.
Venture capitalists from both coasts are also increasingly drawn to the city. A number of investors now call Austin home after relocating from the Bay Area and New York City. They include Jim Breyer of Breyer Capital and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, who said last year he was moving his venture capital firm, 8VC, from Silicon Valley to the city, and Geoff Lewis, founder and managing partner of Bedrock Capital.
Austin wasn’t an overnight success. For years it was known primarily for its software scene — in addition to being the live music capital of the world. But today, new growing sectors include crypto/web3, real estate tech, CPG and insurance technology. As in other maturing markets, companies that have seen success in the past are now spawning a new generation of entrepreneurs as well as attracting others from various locales.
Drawn to the laid-back lifestyle and lower cost of living — relatively speaking — nearly 185 people are moving to Austin on a daily basis. Many of those people work in the tech industry, and many are moving from California.
The Texas capital is home to more capital
Bullish investors have more money than ever to deploy. In 2022 alone, so far, two Austin-based venture firms have announced significant raises in the city — the most recent being Next Coast Ventures. That firm, founded in 2016, announced on March 29, 2022 that it closed $310 million in capital across three funds. Earlier in the month, S3 Ventures raised $250 million for its Fund VII, touting itself as “the largest venture capital fund focused on Texas-based startups.” S3 Ventures founder and managing director Brian Smith notes that when he started the firm in 2005, venture capital in Texas was finally starting to recover from the dot.com bust. At that time, most VC activity was dominated by the now-defunct Austin Ventures and Sevin Rosen Funds.
“Fast forward a few more years, and both AV and SRF had started to wind down. A small crop of mostly sub-$100 million funds appeared, several founded by former AV GPs,” Smith recalls. “Jump to today and those new Texas-focused firms, including ours, have raised multiple funds with the latest ones well over $200 million. Additionally, we have seen several national firms move their HQs or a regional team here. While they are not primarily focused on Texas, they are starting to invest locally, as well.”
This means, he adds, that founders have a broader set of choices for capital partners.
Notably, S3’s investment thesis is focused on Texas. As such, the vast majority of the investments will be in companies headquartered, or with a sizable presence, in the state. It makes initial investments in companies at the seed, Series A and Series B stage and can invest $20 million-plus over the life of a company.
Chris Shonk, co-founder and managing director of ATX Ventures, said his firm is unique in that “everyone” there is both technical and has operating experience.
“ATX will be the first midcontinent VC to have top decile performance two funds in a row,” he told TechCrunch. “It is a true reflection of the vibrancy in the Texas ecosystem and having an operator approach at early-stage VC.”
Shonk has also witnessed the change in the dynamics in the city’s startup scene as it has matured over the years.
“Historically Austin over-indexed on founder and C-suite talent but under-indexed on experienced junior talent who had worked at large tech companies and venture-backed unicorns,” he said. “That has now changed and Austin has an ample market of CXO-executive, VP and junior talent who have VC-backed experience.”
Mike Smerklo moved to Austin from Silicon Valley in 2016 to start Next Coast Ventures with Tom Ball.
“I had spent over 17 years working in the Valley as an entrepreneur and loved every minute of it. However, I felt that a lot — but not all — of what made the Valley so amazing was replicable,” he told TechCrunch. “ … What really convinced me to move here and start Next Coast was the evidence of several key factors that make a great startup ecosystem — a strong entrepreneurial culture, great university systems, successful technology companies and an amazing place to live — exist in Austin. All that was needed was more capital to support it.”
Morgan Flager, managing partner of Silverton Partners — one of the state’s most active investors — believes that Austin has finally gotten respect “as a legitimate top tech ecosystem.”
Sixteen years ago, he said, people questioned his move from Silicon Valley to Austin to join Silverton Partners.
“LPs asked me if we, or anyone else, could build a top-tier VC firm here and doubted if Austin could produce billion-dollar companies with any regularity. Entrepreneurs wondered if there was enough capital and talent in Austin, and later-stage investors questioned how much time they should spend in Texas,” Flager recalls. “Now, those questions have largely been answered and been replaced by different, larger questions — like will Austin ever surpass Silicon Valley? In short, we’ve gone from aspiring to be a market that matters to being the hottest tech city in the country.”
Krishna Srinivasan of LiveOak Partners, which closed on a $210 million fund last year, said the fact his firm was able to raise the fund in less than four months, “was indicative of the strong LP interest in the local opportunity set and the returns we have put up at LiveOak in the past decade.”
Last year’s IPO of Disco, in which LiveOak was a founding investor, at a market cap of over $2 billion, “points to the notion that Texas is relevant again as a legitimate software powerhouse,” he added. “The quality of companies and talent is better than ever before, which augurs for a great entrepreneurial run in the years to come.”
Meanwhile, the area has long had a strong base of angel investors funding companies at the very early stage. The Central Texas Angel Network boasts over 110 members, and its website says that its members have pumped $120 million into nearly 200 startups since its 2006 inception.
Marc Nathan, who publishes the weekly Texas-Squared Startup Newsletter, points to a robust angel community that includes serial entrepreneur and data.world CEO and co-founder Brett Hurt, Andrea Kalmans of Lontra Ventures and Justin Siegel, among many others.
Says Shonk:
The angel scene in Austin has always been vibrant. It has recently been amplified by the number of newly established family offices — largely from the real estate, energy and financial services boom — looking to test their skills at making direct investments. Also a number of coastal funds have deployed scouts to help address Bay Area talent flight to Texas so they now have lines in the water as well.
Comparisons to Silicon Valley
Speaking of Silicon Valley, nearly everyone working in tech in Austin is growing weary of hearing about comparisons to it. The overarching belief is that Austin is its own, unique market and that it will not, and should not, be a carbon copy of Silicon Valley.
Having said that, there are also many commonalities between the two — culturally and aesthetically. Both have lots of green and rolling hills. Both boast outdoor lifestyles and a physically active population. And, of course, both are home to innovation, from universities, startups and Big Tech alike.
Like Silicon Valley, Austin is seeing reinvestments from successful founders. Brett Hurt is an example of a successful founder who continues to help the city’s startup scene flourish by also acting as an active angel investor.
With four exits and over 120 angel investments under his belt, Hurt is vocal about his passion for angel investing, telling TechCrunch: “It was not all that long ago that entrepreneurs in Austin often had to strongly consider picking up and moving to Silicon Valley to successfully court venture capital and angel investors — but a lot has changed in the past few years. In fact, in many cases, we’re even seeing the opposite happen. Today, Austin’s angel investing space is incredibly robust.”
In fact, Hurt’s family office, Hurt Family Investments, was one of the first investors in 77 Austin-based startups, including several unicorns such as Everly Health and ZenBusiness.
“We are always looking for new opportunities, especially in SaaS, to help continue the momentum in our exciting local ecosystem,” he added.
Former Bay Area resident Smerklo believes that Silicon Valley will remain the center of technological innovation for “a long time.”
“I don’t try to compare Silicon Valley with any other region — Austin included,” he said. “Doing so is a bit like trying to compare New York City with Hong Kong. They are different and that is okay. I think the better view is that the global nature of technology supports several great geographic pockets where innovation and entrepreneurship can flourish.”
Flager grew up in Silicon Valley and acknowledges that the two have some similarities.
“The growth and energy in Austin feels like Silicon Valley in the ‘90s,” he said. “The diversity of talented people moving here is also reminiscent of the Valley.”
But, in his view, the two have notable differences. For one, state and local governments in Texas are focused on pro-business policies, Flager said, while California has been criticized for not being a business-friendly environment. Indeed, the lack of state income tax in Texas and a willingness on the part of government officials to offer generous incentives have been a draw for many companies.
Culturally, Flager believes that overall, attitudes differ as well. Austin is often described as a tech community where founders support each other rather than compete. Techstars Austin Managing Director Amos Schwartzfarb agrees. “I think one of our biggest strengths is what a wonderfully collaborative city Austin is,” he told TechCrunch. “It’s very unique in how everyone really wants and helps everyone around them be successful.”
In Austin, for example, you will still see cheers and enthusiasm for funding rounds that would not elicit more than a yawn in Silicon Valley.
“It’s a political climate where freedom of thought is rewarded and everyone can feel welcome,” Flager added. “We have to remember what got us to this point and that’s humility and kindness, not pretense … Somewhere along the way, Silicon Valley seemed to let some of these things slip away. Perhaps some people there thought it was too big and important to stumble or regress — I guess we’ll see. I hope Austin never forgets what got us here.”
Schwartzfarb also tires of the comparisons, noting that people outside the city are “constantly” comparing Austin to Silicon Valley. But here in the city? Not so much.
“As a city, community and ecosystem, we do not make that comparison. We are uniquely our own thing on our own path and I think when others make that comparison it creates an incorrect mental image of what Austin is,” he told TechCrunch. “The valley is unique and nothing like it has or will ever exist again. And similarly, in a very different way, Austin is unique, nothing is like us and nothing has or will ever exist again quite like us.”
Lots of growth, little diversity
The massive growth Austin has seen has brought some significant challenges as well. The city’s infrastructure has struggled to accommodate the influx of people and that is evidenced by the widespread traffic jams. Also, folks moving to town and buying up houses in cash have driven median housing prices up by over 40% in 2021 alone.
This means that many people and families are being priced out of the city and having to move out to surrounding areas, such as Round Rock, Cedar Park, Leander, San Marcos and Buda. The lack of affordable housing has also contributed to the dramatic increase in homelessness.
Still, the median price of a home in the Austin metro area of just under $500,000 remains significantly lower than the current $1.4 million median home price in San Jose, California, for example.
While Next Coast’s Smerklo raves about many things about Austin, from its engineering talent to angel networks to music and breakfast tacos, he also acknowledges that there are weaknesses around growth management and infrastructure.
“The infrastructure is the real challenge as the city has historically not supported investments to match the growth,” he said. “There are several projects underway that will help, but we need to do more to make this an affordable, enjoyable and easy urban environment that works for everyone.”
Other situations that have come up also mirror those that plague San Francisco. Decades ago, Austin was known more for its laid-back vibe and charm that inspired the “Keep Austin Weird” slogan. These days, many of the small businesses that gave us that charm have had to shut down due to rising property taxes or rents and are being replaced by shinier, often upscale and cookie-cutter establishments.
But perhaps the biggest, and most enduring, challenge the city faces is its lack of diversity. Austin is known as the most progressive city in Texas, but some argue that progressiveness is not always consistent and depending on the issue, it can be as backward as some other parts of the state. The city may claim to be welcoming, yet the percentage of Black residents, for example, has steadily decreased over time to an estimated 7% in 2020. Many of Austin’s neighborhoods resemble those seen in Silicon Valley with largely white and Asian residents and far fewer Hispanic and Black people.
S3 Ventures’ Eric Engineer believes that Austin’s greatest strength lies in that it is a place people of all types want to live. And many of those people, he says, are drawn to the city’s “welcoming, meritocratic and free-thinking culture.” As mentioned above, still others are attracted to the business-friendly environment and attractive tech jobs.
“At the same time, Austin has real, but surmountable, challenges related to cost of living, transportation, homelessness and diversity,” he told TechCrunch, “which have the attention of our leaders and voters — with several key investments already underway.”
For example, while nearby Houston has a bad rep for being an unattractive, sprawling city with heavy traffic, it boasts the most ethnically diverse population in the nation and has for several years.
Engineer grew up in Houston and then lived four years in Dallas before spending the last decade in Austin.
“From my perspective, Austin appears less diverse and more segregated than the other two — though that is visibly changing,” he said.
So what does one do if they’re trying to boost diversity in a city that is not known for its diversity?
For Preston James, it was to help start DivInc — a nonprofit that aims to bridge the gap between underrepresented entrepreneurs and the resources they need to build profitable, high-growth companies — in 2016.
Today, he notes, Austin is home to an “insane talent pool” and several new emerging funds exclusively focused on Black, Latinx and women founders, including BEAM, The Fund, New Type Ventures, Agave Fund, Silicon Hills Capital and True Wealth Ventures (which was considered the first of its kind in the city).
While James is excited about all the venture activity taking place, he wonders how much is going to underrepresented founders and women.
“We have to be proud enough in our achievements to also acknowledge where we’re still falling short too, especially for underestimated founders,” James said.
Still, he believes that while Austin still has “a long way to go in improving diversity,” there are rarely quick fixes to historically systemic racial and gender equity issues in our society.
Some ways to help move things along, in James’ view, are for existing funds to be willing to fund “a lot more diverse founders early — often and equitably at the pre-seed and Series A stages.”
He also thinks the city needs to be home to more emerging funds focused on investing in underestimated founders.
“This will help build the pipeline of unicorn companies with diverse founders. In addition, these emerging funds will also create a pipeline of potential diverse VC partners for traditional VC firms,” James said.
He also believes all the Big Tech companies could be doing more with their environmental, social and governance (ESG) initiatives, such as making more grant investments with a special focus on supporting underrepresented founded companies and organizations like DivInc “that provide strong programming and support systems for them.”
Sam Haytham, founder of Austin startup Kiro Action, says he is painfully aware of the lack of “brown and Black” diversity in the startup scene. Haytham is not currently seeking venture money but when he does, he expects it to be a more difficult process than that of many of his counterparts.
“I think the opportunities for diverse founders are very limited,” he told TechCrunch. “When you look at VC groups, they’re very male and very white. And if you want to get funded, and are white and male, you can get funded even before you have an idea.”
“Meanwhile, diverse founders are literally sitting there scratching to get every little bit to push their product to market. It’s even more difficult for minority and women founders with the funding systems in place,” he added.
For now, Kiro Action — a recent SXSW pitch winner — is self-funded and focused on addressing two of the biggest problems that Austin faces: homelessness and affordable housing.
“Our true business is social good, where the housing can be used for general/veteran homelessness, sheltering refugees and migrant farm worker housing,” Haytham said. “The same product can be used to fill multiple social good and consumer needs, ​​including crisis response housing for insurance companies, pop-up hotels and backyard flex space for consumers.”
Maria Miller, co-founder and COO of venture-backed Spot, moved to Austin after commuting between New York and Dallas.
“I found Austin to be a great balance of art, entrepreneurship and people,” she said. Miller co-founded Spot Insurance, a health insurance tech startup, in 2017. The startup offers injury insurance to protect against unexpected medical expenses, has raised over $23 million in venture funding and is on track for 500% growth this year, according to Miller.
To Miller, the lack of diversity that may exist in Austin is not exclusive to the city and has not taken away from the support she has received as a founder.
“I believe there is a lack of minority and women founders everywhere,” she told TechCrunch. “Our founder community in Austin is incredibly supportive, everyone always willing to make an introduction to talent or investors, sharing the ups and downs and allowing a level of vulnerability I haven’t experienced elsewhere.”

WSJ : French Prosecutors Launch Probe After Senate Scrutiny Of Macron Government

French Prosecutors Launch Probe After Senate Scrutiny Of Macron Government Spending on McKinsey
Launch of investigation delivers a blow to French president just days before election

PARIS—French prosecutors have opened a tax-fraud and money-laundering investigation stemming from a Senate report on government spending on consulting firms, delivering a blow to President Emmanuel Macron just days before voters head to the polls.

France’s financial prosecutors issued a brief statement Wednesday saying they were probing the findings of a Senate report published last month. The report detailed how the government spent 893.9 million euros, equivalent to $975.8 million, last year on consultants, including McKinsey & Co. That was a sizable increase on the €379.1 million spent in 2018, Mr. Macron’s first full year in power, the report said.

Prosecutors said their investigation was focused on potential tax fraud and money laundering, without naming any suspects. The Senate report alleged that McKinsey, which is based in New York, hasn’t paid corporate tax in France for at least a decade, despite making €329 million in revenue in the country in 2020 and employing some 600 people.

On Wednesday the government said it has always called for full transparency on McKinsey’s fiscal practices, adding that the finance ministry had already opened an investigation into the firm’s tax situation in December, before the Senate’s report was published.

“The financial prosecutor’s probe is part of this same approach,” government spokesman Gabriel Attal told reporters. “This consulting firm will pay what it must pay.”

Spokespeople for McKinsey and prosecutors didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

The French unit of McKinsey has previously said it “complies with applicable French tax and social-security regulations.” The company said that from 2011 to 2020, it paid “over €422 million in French taxes and social-security contributions, representing nearly 20% of its cumulative revenue over the same period.”

Mr. Macron has said there was nothing improper about the consulting-firm contracts, adding that he had fought since the start of his term to make sure companies that operate and make profit in France pay taxes.

The move by prosecutors comes as millions of voters prepare to head to the polls Sunday for the first round of voting in France’s presidential election.

Mr. Macron built a double-digit lead over far-right challenger Marine Le Pen last month. That margin, however, has been whittled down in recent days with one poll showing Mr. Macron defeating Ms. Le Pen by just 3 percentage points in the April 24 runoff. That is a far cry from the 30-point margin of victory he notched in 2017.

Dubbed the affaire McKinsey by the French media, the scandal has provided fodder for opponents who cast Mr. Macron, a former investment banker, as being part of a cabal of global elites that aims to dismantle France’s public services. His government’s reliance on globe-spanning consulting firms has generated bewilderment in a country that employs an army of civil servants to manage state affairs.

“Finally!” said far-right candidate Éric Zemmour in a Twitter post after the prosecutors issued their statement. Mr. Zemmour, a former TV pundit, has been publicly pressing prosecutors to probe the matter.

The government has said the use of private consulting firms by governments is nothing new, pointing to a section in the Senate report that said France used them less than Germany, the U.K. and other neighbors. Two-thirds of the total expenditure on consultants was for IT and cybersecurity services, the government said.

The Senate, which is dominated by Mr. Macron’s conservative opposition, filed a criminal complaint in late March alleging that a McKinsey executive gave false testimony in telling a Senate hearing the firm paid corporate taxes.

In its report, the Senate highlighted McKinsey’s work on France’s Covid-19 response, including its vaccine rollout, for which the consulting firm received some €12.33 million.

The report said McKinsey’s French unit reduced its tax liability to “nothing or negative” by booking charges from its U.S. headquarters for services such as administrative support and the use of its brand.

“It seems we’re dealing with a caricature of tax optimization,” the Senate report said.

FT : Binance’s US affiliate valued at $4.5bn in debut funding round

Binance’s US affiliate valued at $4.5bn in debut funding round
Valuation trails that of rival FTX US as investors remain concerned over regulatory risks

Binance’s US affiliate has been valued at $4.5bn in its first fundraising round, far less than its main rival as regulatory concerns muddy the outlook for Changpeng Zhao’s sprawling network of crypto companies.

On Wednesday, Binance.US said it had raised $200mn from investors, valuing the group at just over half of the $8bn valuation investors put on FTX’s US business in January.

Regulators in major jurisdictions have tightened their scrutiny of massive cryptocurrency platforms and increased their supervision of protocols and procedures to prevent criminal activity. Several crypto platforms have opened up US offshoots to contend with particularly prickly regulations that come with serving American retail investors.

The largest investor in Binance.US is Zhao, the chief executive and founder of the much larger global Binance exchange.

Binance last year faced a storm of censures by global financial regulators, who flagged up worries about the complex financial products that are accessible to everyday traders on its international platform and about its anti-money laundering policies. The group says that it blocks US users from its global platform, pushing them instead to the US arm.

Binance.US has had three chief executives since its founding in 2019. Brian Brooks, a former senior US regulator, resigned in August after only three months on the job.

Steven McClurg, chief investment officer of digital asset specialist Valkyrie Investments said that the turnover at the top of Binance.US — and particularly Brooks’s abrupt exit — had worried investors.

“There is definitely a concern that there might be regulatory issues. Whether these concerns are founded or not, the sudden departure of an ex-regulator is enough to make investors a bit nervous,” McClurg said.

A venture capital investor with experience in crypto added that the main exchange’s tussle with regulators, including those in big financial hubs including the UK and Singapore, have placed a “cloud” over the US affiliate.

“There is generally a bit of a reputational question mark,” he said.

Binance.US, which licenses Binance’s exchange technology, is the 11th largest crypto exchange by spot trading volume, according to data from CryptoCompare in January, with higher volumes than well-known rivals such as the Winklevoss twins’ Gemini. FTX US’s trading volumes are roughly two-thirds the size, on average, this year.

Rival FTX.US, led by chief executive Sam Bankman-Fried, attracted $400mn in its first funding round from investors such as Singaporean state vehicle Temasek, valuing the company at $8bn.

At the same time, investors poured $400mn into parent company FTX as a separate deal, putting a $32bn price tag on the global company. The funds came from high-profile investors including the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board and SoftBank Vision Fund 2. FTX has also secured backing from BlackRock and Sequoia in previous rounds.

Brian Shroder, chief executive of Binance.US said the group is “very pleased with the current valuation”. He added that the company will use some of the funds for developing new products, as the exchange currently only offers cash trading. FTX also offers derivatives contracts, explaining some of the gap in the valuation of the two rivals, he said.

“We are confident that we’ll be achieving an even higher valuation [soon],” Shroder said.

Investors in the Binance.US deal included VanEck and stablecoin group Circle’s venture capital arm. VanEck also put money into FTX as part of a fundraising last summer. Schroder said the company would use the $200mn raised to improve its spot trading platform and to invest in marketing and consumer education initiatives as well as launching new products.

Zhao told the Financial Times earlier this year that Binance had beefed up its compliance arm and strengthened processes to comply with rules. He said the global exchange was not looking to raise investment.