tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30578699262752436782024-03-07T17:15:19.485-08:00Lies, Damn Lies, and Startup PRObservations from an engineer on the world of venture capital and startupsStartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.comBlogger177125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-81144870475271387282023-03-15T21:33:00.006-07:002023-03-15T21:33:30.533-07:00Moving to Substack<p style="text-align: justify;">After a long period of being too busy to post, I'll be starting more regular posts, but I'll be moving to Substack. Blogger just wasn't cutting it anymore. First post is on our experience at Acoustiic dealing with the SVB collapse and some thoughts on the whole situation.</p><p><a href="https://liesandstartuppr.substack.com/">Paul’s Substack | Paul Reynolds | Substack</a></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-25340249260282781922021-10-17T15:35:00.003-07:002021-10-17T15:35:52.634-07:00Sad News<p style="text-align: justify;">I recently learned that Lee Gomes, the journalist<a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/experts-still-think-ubeamrsquos-throughtheair-charging-tech-is-unlikely"> who published the most detailed and accurate report on issues around uBeam</a>, had died. I came to know Lee after I left uBeam and talked with him often, though in the last couple of years clearly less than I should have. Lee was a great tech journalist, determined to get to the truths of what he was looking into, always being sure to get good sources and triple check everything. He was also just a good person, and I had many calls with him covering topics like US and UK politics - he seemed to especially enjoy talking with me about Brexit.</p><p><a href="https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/sfgate/name/lee-gomes-obituary?id=23371687">There's a detailed obituary on his life and career here</a>.</p><p>Sad to hear this, and a great loss.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-43195602231226879872021-10-17T15:26:00.002-07:002021-10-17T15:26:14.953-07:00uBeam and MEMS Issue<p> A recent post by a former uBeam engineer made an interesting comment:
</p><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">The biggest annoyance at uBeam was if the demo units were running when you took a call. The other side was always like "what the HELL is going on over there?" "Oh yeah sorry I'll go in the other room." The ultrasound down-mixes in the MEMS mic.</p>— Alexander the OK (@alexwhittemore) <a href="https://twitter.com/alexwhittemore/status/1441824887367032837?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<p></p><p><br /></p><p>"<i>The biggest annoyance at uBeam was if the demo units were running when you took a call. The other side was always like "what the HELL is going on over there?" "Oh yeah sorry I'll go in the other room." The ultrasound down-mixes in the MEMS mic</i>."</p><p>I'd posted before on the <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/07/mems-gyroscopes-smartphones-and.html">potential effects of ultrasound on gyros and MEMS</a>, this is the first I've heard of uBeam affecting phones this way. I'm sure this information was relayed to customers and investors for them to take into account...</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-56986138288202469472021-07-12T11:18:00.003-07:002021-07-12T11:26:49.864-07:00Dead Startup Toys<p style="text-align: justify;">For all of you that wish you could own one of the cool dead startup gadgets that gets written about here, then <a href="https://deadstartuptoys.com/">Dead Startup Toys</a> will do it for you - well, kinda. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnXqcidRnUJ_534l1y51nUNv9w-uUtkpEVJucoBpkvnw1HScrDje45i9fdu-FiZcTt-2BrkPbtyY8W1VrLdU4T6gktIC9xwh2dz85hXobd6UotB-E_kTdUtfAdQ_zkIM1bDxSvE6qJrD8/s1880/dst.PNG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1319" data-original-width="1880" height="281" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnXqcidRnUJ_534l1y51nUNv9w-uUtkpEVJucoBpkvnw1HScrDje45i9fdu-FiZcTt-2BrkPbtyY8W1VrLdU4T6gktIC9xwh2dz85hXobd6UotB-E_kTdUtfAdQ_zkIM1bDxSvE6qJrD8/w400-h281/dst.PNG" width="400" /></a></div><p style="text-align: justify;">Toy replicas of failed companies including <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2016/08/how-is-this-thing.html">Juicero</a> and <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/search/label/theranos">Theranos</a>, though selling out fast as the Coolest Cooler and Jibo are already gone. There's a small "bio" of each product as you click through. Nothing from uBeam or Energous there though, sad to say. Will <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/search/label/june">June</a> or <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/search/label/sunflower">Sunflower</a> make it there? I'm interested to see their next toys.</p><p>The group making these is really interesting - <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSCHF">MSCHF</a> - I think this might be my favorite thing they've done:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i>In February 2021 the group purchased a Boston Dynamics robot dog, and mounted a paintball gun on it. The robot was used in a live performance that allowed users of the MSCHF app to control the robot and its paintball gun. After MSCHF publicly criticized the potential use of robotic dogs by police forces, Boston Dynamics released a statement criticizing the use of the robot in an artwork</i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><br /></p>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-11136642606805287772021-05-07T08:21:00.003-07:002021-05-07T08:31:53.666-07:00Travel - Then vs Now<p style="text-align: justify;">I'm fortunate enough to be fully vaccinated, so a couple weeks ago I took my first plane flight in over a year. For most of the prior 15 years or so I've flown around 50 to 100,000 miles a year, so a moderate flyer (given 100,000 miles flown is around 200 hours in the air, or over a solid week, it's still pretty significant). I went and visited friends in the NE of the US, and damn do I miss socializing and just hanging out with people. Airports and planes are as awful as you remember, but they get you to places and people that are worth it all. Before I left, I looked at my phone for a map of where I'd been in the previous 6 months:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz2RVZhUvPMQ276cT939zdTflJpN5f96oTZb6MwQAQBwWEZoL-3DafAmtigteXADwXAt9gF42rR-obgrnvsJ5Wv9EUSqwkHIkV749R1fr4n6yd-lDI6qfa3YIi_juvKXkDN2jVOzMUDAI/s920/travelMar21.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="576" data-original-width="920" height="250" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz2RVZhUvPMQ276cT939zdTflJpN5f96oTZb6MwQAQBwWEZoL-3DafAmtigteXADwXAt9gF42rR-obgrnvsJ5Wv9EUSqwkHIkV749R1fr4n6yd-lDI6qfa3YIi_juvKXkDN2jVOzMUDAI/w400-h250/travelMar21.PNG" width="400" /></a></div><p></p><p style="text-align: justify;">You might be able to spot where I go vaccinated. King County, WA, where I live, you couldn't find an appointment for love nor money - but drive out a couple hours to rural eastern WA and you had your pick that day. It's also a really scenic drive. And here is the equivalent time period two years prior:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPFxcAxqrJC5JD1fs2AtWmEiMlc4ZDnesD_zIYz5bDIhUZR7FN3HsRIiWlpcHPAF20_EzAd_2Wm3y0r61hUXUGZ8IK4ufCObGRMV1Dxu_Qx477QEPhyphenhyphenxrd9ZPVhCsxlNU87Ua9IIOe-t0/s1727/travelMar19.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="826" data-original-width="1727" height="191" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPFxcAxqrJC5JD1fs2AtWmEiMlc4ZDnesD_zIYz5bDIhUZR7FN3HsRIiWlpcHPAF20_EzAd_2Wm3y0r61hUXUGZ8IK4ufCObGRMV1Dxu_Qx477QEPhyphenhyphenxrd9ZPVhCsxlNU87Ua9IIOe-t0/w400-h191/travelMar19.PNG" width="400" /></a></div><p></p><p style="text-align: justify;">I think my personal carbon footprint was a little larger in 2018 than 2020. Despite the pain of flying, I'm still looking forward to getting out there again, and as soon as the UK drops the test/quarantine on arrival, I'll be heading back there. Since I moved to the US I'd been back in the UK once or twice a year and saw family, 2020 was the first year I hadn't and so it'll likely be a 2 year gap. Fortunately, despite being a basket case in most other regards, the UK did a great job with vaccinations (thank you NHS, yay socialized healthcare), and my mother got her first vaccine in mid January, which for those of you with elderly relatives will know the relief. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">For those in the US who wonder about the value of a good single healthcare system, the NHS in the UK prioritized similarly (primarily age) but literally called up each person and sent letters saying "It's your turn in 2 weeks, here's your appointment" and proceeded that way. The UK also took the route of making the gap between the two shots up to 12 weeks, not the 3/4 in the US, to maximise the number of people with one shot. From people I know the gap seems closer to 9 weeks in practice.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">For those in the UK wondering the US in comparison (in the way back of a few weeks ago when there were more supply restrictions) you were pretty much on your own - vaccines were spread between some pharmacies, some hospital vaccination sites, some mass vaccination sites, and you needed an appointment, which was all done through a mish-mash of systems and you needed to be somewhat tech savvy, have time on your hands, and be willing to move quickly which basically was the exact opposite of what many key groups such as the elderly or front line workers with multiple jobs had. And everyone seems to know someone who skipped the line because they knew someone who knew someone, or worked for the right company (I knew work-from-home accountants at Amazon, with no morbidities, who got it in February because... well they were Amazon. And I knew people with health issues who had to wait.), or if you loitered around pharmacies at closing time and got leftover doses. Now in the US we've reached the point where any adult can get it via walkin - amazing the effect of competency at the top - there are more doses than willing people, thank you anti-vaxxers for making it harder.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Maybe I'll post my equivalent travel again in a year. I hope it's closer to that second picture than the first, because that means our world has returned at least somewhat back to what it was before.</p>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-90989480468806196812021-05-04T14:02:00.006-07:002021-05-07T08:31:31.982-07:00My Spy in uBeam<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1cPYTVkpJE9swoIE6MmzeicxY736qzD_3ihhAo5N1b7dUDtIHLqd0BIhoyzJ71H7sQIiMCuAwhbryDs7A7JTmzdMOSQeicuBVFWPoctWWkhZIpWUcg1qCN4p8ZR2haWrTrvbCp2PCPH4/s1920/fe8740c61c33bc8aef4e5f4c24e00b83c2d8c28er1-1920-1080v2_uhq.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1cPYTVkpJE9swoIE6MmzeicxY736qzD_3ihhAo5N1b7dUDtIHLqd0BIhoyzJ71H7sQIiMCuAwhbryDs7A7JTmzdMOSQeicuBVFWPoctWWkhZIpWUcg1qCN4p8ZR2haWrTrvbCp2PCPH4/s320/fe8740c61c33bc8aef4e5f4c24e00b83c2d8c28er1-1920-1080v2_uhq.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p style="text-align: justify;">Now that <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2021/05/its-ex-ubeam.html">uBeam is dead</a>, I can reveal a secret that I have kept close to my chest for years. You see, for some time after I left the company I had a spy in uBeam, someone who quietly passed information to me about who they were interviewing, companies they visited and were discussing deals with. Management eventually realized this information was being leaked, and despite some significant efforts to root them out the spy evaded the devious traps that were set for them. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">Regardless of the danger to them I now have to let everyone know - that spy was...</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><br /></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i>Meredith Perry</i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><br /></p><p style="text-align: justify;">Yep. It was the co-founder and CEO herself. You see I was still a first connection to Perry on LinkedIn after I had left the company, and she was quite diligent about connecting with every person that was interviewed, every company executive, manager, investor, or similar she spoke to. I didn't even have to actively go looking, the connections just kept appearing in my feed, as LinkedIn especially at that time just shoved them in your face. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">Knowing the industry, I had a pretty good idea of what the conversations might be about or the positions the person was interviewing for. Journalists would regularly call me at that time with questions about the company, and I would mention companies I thought they might be speaking to (avoiding any that I might have learned about while employed there). I guess the journalists called them every now and then and sometimes the people in question would ask Perry why they were contacted, thus revealing the presence of a spy.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Now at this point I have to apologize to a number of the staff who were still there at the time, because Perry immediately assumed one or more of them was leaking (to be clear, no-one at uBeam I knew socially ever told me company proprietary information, and I didn't ask). They were repeatedly warned, grilled, and placed under suspicion to a point I later learned might even have involved Perry having IT give her the access to read all the emails of the staff each day.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">This does not even cover the stuff Perry would just blurt out on calls with people in the industry I knew - she'd call up people and basically just ask them to work for uBeam, talking about what they were doing, and what deals were in the works, all without an NDA. I'd then get an email about it or hear at the next conference.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">So the moral of the story? I have no idea. I just still find it all funny to this day.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><br /></p>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-12274270683739891842021-05-03T22:01:00.004-07:002021-05-07T08:31:16.592-07:00It's an ex-uBeam...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2U1DscnEpYBlOnkopzkH_2nR7TZcuaTyxT6igYc3PnskMkStoa8ZGyCeBhu1N0CK2a46eQAMvv8BswpLxATy5rgWuEnM765te37AGSAUnaOXPiEvx-_WT2FuPfFmSKhuihgVpTcMnLLg/s1871/5c34af5197c562.55990196.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1046" data-original-width="1871" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2U1DscnEpYBlOnkopzkH_2nR7TZcuaTyxT6igYc3PnskMkStoa8ZGyCeBhu1N0CK2a46eQAMvv8BswpLxATy5rgWuEnM765te37AGSAUnaOXPiEvx-_WT2FuPfFmSKhuihgVpTcMnLLg/s320/5c34af5197c562.55990196.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Just shy of its 10th birthday and with between $40 and $48 million of investment (estimated), it appears uBeam (recently <a href="https://sonicenergy.com/">Sonic Energy</a>) has shuffled off its mortal coil. While some may claim it's simply pining for the fjords or merely stunned, I've heard that a few weeks ago the last remaining employees were told they were terminated effective immediately and the doors were closed. Whether the company will actually be killed, or carry on in zombie form as an asset holding entity remains to be seen, but reportedly it will be OurCrowd, the crowdfunding group who were significant investors in the later rounds, that take possession. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I'm sure co-Founder and former CEO Perry will claim that the company was taken from her too soon and would have succeeded if only under her watch, or it was those pesky engineers just not implementing her vision, but to use her own phrase <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/06/01/ubeams-meredith-perry-shows-her-stealth-wireless-charging-technology-really-works/102336880/">"Our industry is binary, your tech works, or it doesn't,"</a>. In this case, it doesn't. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">So what <i>did</i> they have? From descriptions given to me by those who saw it in operation like prospective customers, there were moderately bulky panels that transferred power on the milliWatt level (a phone charges at ~1 Watt or more) at around a meter, with limited steering and tracking. I never got to hear any efficiency numbers, but I'd guess single digit % at best. Under those conditions the question to ask is <i>"How long will a battery the size of the receiver last with the same milliWatt draw?"</i> and as always <i>"If it's not moving will a wire be simpler, cheaper, and more reliable?"</i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Where this might work is a low power demand system like remote sensors, you can get close to and in line of sight, that don't move much, where batteries aren't allowed, and you can't run a wire to. Pretty niche market.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Recent patent applications (not grants, <a href="https://uspto.report/patent/app/20200403142">here</a> and <a href="https://uspto.report/patent/app/20200389739">here</a>) show a system made up of hexagonal modules, each with a speaker like cone attached. I'd be interested in seeing a side by side comparison with the <a href="https://www.murata.com/en-us/products/sensor/ultrasonic/overview/lineup/open">Murata S40</a> devices as it is a very similar principle, I suspect they would be comparable, perhaps slightly more narrowband, and a bit more expensive. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This doesn't even begin to address the <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/01/ultrasound-in-air-safety-and-regulations.html">question of safety</a> - if it's at 145 dB it certainly exceeds limits in most countries and it looks like also in the US as of today. Further, the transducers are also quite wide, and unless they send most energy straightforward (which would limit steering) then they will generate grating lobes when used as an array and send energy at undesired directions. Perhaps now it's defunct uBeam can release the claimed studies by independent third parties that "proves" it is safe, but bizarrely were never made public.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It's shame that no-one sensible told the board in summer 2015, after "only" about $8 million had been spent, that leadership was taking the company in the wrong direction, increasingly "exaggerated claims" on performance were being made, and that a pivot was needed. But here we are - end of an era. </div>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-32952230896343156762021-05-01T17:03:00.008-07:002021-05-01T20:55:28.440-07:00Quite the 18 Months<p style="text-align: justify;">My last post was December 2019, putting this at nearly 18 months since I last wrote anything here. It's not for lack of interest, but simply I was massively overloaded with work, commitments, and personal issues that meant something had to go, and so it was the blogging. Things are somewhat more stable now, so I'm intending on getting back to this on a semi-regular basis. Interestingly my <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-sausage-factory.html">first post</a> on this blog was 15th April 2016, so just over 5 years now since I started it. Long enough that my NDA with uBeam has now expired - though don't expect any changes in what I write, things traditionally and reasonably covered by an NDA are not things I will talk about even on uBeam.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">So what have I been up to? Well, I quit my full time job at the beginning of 2020 to concentrate on a company I co-founded with the other VP Engineering from uBeam, Sean Taffler. The company is <a href="http://acoustiic.com/">Acoustiic</a>, and our goal is to enable the next generation of non-invasive cancer surgery using High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_focused_ultrasound">HIFU</a>). </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhyQgbhoDp-stXPT3lJtfOnU3wKhm5EG8tUqp6QHWqRcL_FoJbWnZeeEupEg1LCj0aAfmr-vwr7rBVYt-lZebGI1vz9aUyU9m4LyydWgCRS8n430aafYvMcfNZwGnaByFsXWTAdtHsXAT8/s1024/Acoustiic-3d1_003flat_flip003-FINAL-halfres-1024x605.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="605" data-original-width="1024" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhyQgbhoDp-stXPT3lJtfOnU3wKhm5EG8tUqp6QHWqRcL_FoJbWnZeeEupEg1LCj0aAfmr-vwr7rBVYt-lZebGI1vz9aUyU9m4LyydWgCRS8n430aafYvMcfNZwGnaByFsXWTAdtHsXAT8/s320/Acoustiic-3d1_003flat_flip003-FINAL-halfres-1024x605.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><p style="text-align: justify;">This is a well known technique, currently growing in applications, with an increasing number of FDA approvals and insurance reimbursements - if you want to read more there's a great resource at the <a href="https://www.fusfoundation.org/">Focused Ultrasound Foundation</a>, a non-profit dedicated to enabling better medical outcomes from ultrasound. What we aim to offer is the next generation of systems for HIFU - more precise, more controllable, faster - using advanced manufacturing techniques, custom electronics, and leveraging the compute power available today. Sean did an interview with the FUS Foundation on FDA approvals recently, you can read it <a href="https://www.fusfoundation.org/the-foundation/news-media/blog/an-inside-look-at-obtaining-breakthrough-device-designation">here</a>.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">The other thing that was eating up my time is that starting in 2020 I became both the President of the <a href="https://ieee-uffc.org/">IEEE Society for Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control</a> (UFFC) and the <a href="https://2020.ieee-ius.org/">General Co-Chair for our largest conference</a>. Each is a fairly hectic job under normal conditions, but add in starting a new company and a pandemic and everything goes to hell - shifting a ~2000 person conference from in-person to all online at short notice, while negotiating with the original venue not to lose a large deposit, was certainly a novel experience. It was a lot of work, but also gave us the opportunity to pull forward online presentation options years faster than would be possible otherwise. For those interested in some of the things we did, there are some newsletter articles I wrote for UFFC that can be found here (<a href="https://ieee-uffc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/UFFC-Newsletter-May-2020.pdf">May 20</a>, <a href="https://ieee-uffc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/UFFC-S-Newsletter-August-2020.pdf">August 20</a>, <a href="https://ieee-uffc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/UFFC-Newsletter-November-2020.pdf">November 20</a>, <a href="https://ieee-uffc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/IEEE-UFFC-S-Newsletter-March-2021.pdf">April 20</a>). I also did an article on SBIR (Small Business Innovation and Research) grants for the IEEE, it's <a href="https://entrepreneurship.ieee.org/2020_05_08_SBIR-non-dilutive-funding/">here</a> and I will also post <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2021/04/sbir-non-dilutive-funding-for-your.html">here</a> as a blog post now it's been up a while.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">There are still a few uBeam stories to be told, and I'll get to them over time, but I'll likely be transitioning to talking about other startup and fundraising topics since that's the world I'm living in now. So, let's see if I can do a little better than 18 months for my next post...</p>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-19754502625945626822021-04-30T17:04:00.018-07:002021-05-02T09:12:21.512-07:00SBIR – Non Dilutive Funding for Your Company<p><i><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="text-align: justify;">This is a reblog of an interview I did last year for IEEE-USA, the original can be found</span><a href="https://entrepreneurship.ieee.org/2020_05_08_SBIR-non-dilutive-funding/" style="text-align: justify;"> here</a><span style="text-align: justify;">.</span></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">What
if I told you there is a funding opportunity in the US that is restricted to
small companies, focuses on technology, and takes no equity (non-dilutive),
debt stake (grant or contract, not a loan), or claim on Intellectual Property
(IP) for what may be a seven figure investment? The SBIR – Small Business
Innovation Research – program has been operating since 1982, providing funding
totaling over $2 billion per year, and giving early starting capital to
companies that grow from there including the likes of Symantec, Qualcomm,
Intuitive Surgical, and Illumina. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">History<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">The
SBIR program came into law in 1982, founded by Roland Tibbetts, whose goal was
to fund innovation, supporting American companies and giving them the support
to take ideas to a stage where other private investment can take over. It was
last renewed as part of the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act and is
currently authorized to September 2022.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">All
federal agencies with a large R&D budget are required to set aside part of
that budget (3.2%) exclusively for small businesses, with 500 or fewer
employees, that are majority owned by Americans and permanent residents. There
are 11 agencies that administer SBIRs - the Department of Defense (DoD) and
National Institutes of Health (NIH) are by far the largest and account for
nearly 70% of the ~$2.5 billion of funding, then Department of Energy (DoE),
National Science Foundation (NSF), and NASA provide under 10% each, and the
remainder is split between the other 6 agencies. Application processes vary
between agencies, but there are common factors between them.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">The
Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) is a sister program to SBIR. It is
similar but requires participation of an academic partner, is restricted to a
smaller number of agencies, and with a smaller set-aside. Aside from these
differences, the broad strokes of SBIR also apply to STTR.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">SBIR Phases<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Most
SBIRs start with an application for a Phase I – often a proof of concept – that
is expected to take between 6 and 12 months, with funding for $100,000 to
$400,000 (depending upon agency and project area). Applications usually take
the form of a 6 to 12 page technical proposal, a project plan, a
commercialization plan, a single page budget, personnel biographies, letters of
support, and other relevant information. The proposal is reviewed by a
committee, and typically awardees are notified and funded within 4 to 6 months.
By the end of Phase I, the company has ideally demonstrated a proof of concept,
and its competency, to take the project further.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Phase
II is a more substantial effort with greater budgets – up to around 3 years and
$2,000,000 (again, depending on agency and topic). Usually an agency invites a
company to apply for a Phase II after a successful Phase I – there are some
Fast-track and “Direct to Phase II” options but are unusual. The application is
usually much more detailed, and budget and timelines come under more intense
scrutiny, and so is recommended for more seasoned applicants. By the end of
Phase II, a successful project is usually expected to have something between a
working prototype and a commercial product.</span><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Phase
III is the commercialization phase and receives no specific SBIR funds, though
some agencies do have matching and follow on funding. Agencies with very
specific needs often try to ensure valuable technologies make it to market,
such as the DoD connecting a small business with primes like Boeing.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">With
a few months between Phase I and II, it can take as much as 5 years to get from
application to the end of a successful Phase II – these are not small projects
or commitments!</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Application Process<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Companies
applying for SBIRs need to follow a few administrative basics – the first is
setting up a for-profit company (e.g. an LLC, C-corp etc) in the US, with
>50% ownership by US citizens or permanent residents, and obtaining an
Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the IRS. The company should then
apply to </span><a href="https://fedgov.dnb.com/webform/"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Dun
and Bradstreet for a DUNS</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> – a unique identifying number. (They
may try to sell you other services. Just keep telling them you need it for a
federal grant application and you get it for free). The next step is
registering with the </span><a href="https://sam.gov/SAM/"><span style="line-height: 115%;">System
for Award Management (SAM)</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> to apply for government contracts.
As you can see, all this takes some time and effort, and can take a couple of
weeks to complete. The SBIR.gov site has a </span><a href="https://www.sbir.gov/registration"><span style="line-height: 115%;">walkthrough</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">
to help here.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Each
agency has a specific application site. NSF uses </span><a href="https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Fastlane</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">,
the NIH uses </span><a href="https://public.era.nih.gov/commons/public/login.do?TARGET=https%3A%2F%2Fpublic.era.nih.gov%2Fcommons%2FcommonsInit.do"><span style="line-height: 115%;">eRA
Commons</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">, the DoD uses </span><a href="https://www.dodsbirsttr.mil/submissions/login"><span style="line-height: 115%;">DSIP</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">
etc. Each site has its own registration requirements for the company and
potentially the key investigation staff, that also may take a few days to
setup. I usually tell applying companies to allow a month prior to submission
to get this process completely done the first time. Subsequent applications are
then much faster.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Each
agency like the </span><a href="https://rt.cto.mil/rtl-small-business-resources/sbir-sttr/"><span style="line-height: 115%;">DoD</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">,
</span><a href="https://sbir.nih.gov/"><span style="line-height: 115%;">NIH</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">,
</span><a href="https://seedfund.nsf.gov/"><span style="line-height: 115%;">NSF</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">,
</span><a href="https://www.energy.gov/science/sbir/small-business-innovation-research-and-small-business-technology-transfer"><span style="line-height: 115%;">DoE</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">,
and </span><a href="https://sbir.gsfc.nasa.gov/"><span style="line-height: 115%;">NASA</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">
maintain their own SBIR websites, while there is also an overall </span><a href="https://www.sbir.gov/"><span style="line-height: 115%;">SBIR</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> site, where more
details on submission can be found.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="background: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Every proposal has key staff and a Principal
Investigator (PI) who must work at least 50% of their time at the company. Proposed
budgets may cover items such as salary for key staff, consultants, equipment,
and materials, justifiable travel, as well as reasonable overhead costs. The
majority of the budget must be spent within the company (not outsourced), and
any outsourced work should be done within the USA.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Agency Specifics<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">As
mentioned, each agency administers the SBIR in its own way. The DoD has very
targeted needs and this is reflected in its methodology. Twice a year the DoD
SBIR topics are opened up, and each branch has a number of targeted topics (For
example, the Navy may call for development of a more compact and higher
performing SONAR buoy. The application deadline is about 2 months after the
topic release, after which the topic is gone.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">The
NSF has a different approach, with 4 deadlines a year, where a submission on
any topic within its remit is encouraged. Companies can pre-submit a short
description to the NSF, and receive feedback on whether an application is
warranted or not.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">The
NIH has a mix, with three submission dates a year for most applications, which
similar to the NSF can be anything within its broad remit. Applicants are
usually encouraged to speak to the SBIR manager in that area to gauge general
response, and as a courtesy to let the NIH staff for review. The NIH also has
calls on specific topics that run for a limited period, for example one to two
years, on areas of particular need. Dates on some topics may vary slightly.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">How Agencies Benefit<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">What
do the agencies get for this money? First of all, they don’t get equity in your
company, they don’t get paid back, they don’t own any product or IP that is
created, and provided you label everything sent to them in reports they don’t
own data rights either.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">They
do get research and products in areas critical to them. The products may not
sell, or the research may show an approach is not viable, but it’s understood
that there is risk involved. You owe them the reports, milestones, and
deliverables listed in the proposal. Even then if the ongoing research shows a
pivot is needed, every monitor I have been involved with has been very
reasonable about changing course.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">In
most cases the project monitors are have spent their career in these fields and
care deeply about curing disease, advancing technology areas, or helping those
in the military get the best equipment and tools, or whatever their area is.
They aren’t in this for personal reward, and they want you to commercially
succeed because it means more and better products in their key areas. In my
personal experience, almost every government agency representative is an
exceptional advocate for their field, and works hard to get positive outcomes
for the company, agency, and the country.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">The
other side of this is that the funding for SBIRs comes from an overall pot, not
from an individual group’s budget. Getting awards in their area effectively
increases their departmental budget, and your success benefits them in multiple
ways. They *want* you to be the next Qualcomm.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">This
is one of the few times you will have a counterparty who doesn’t care solely
about the bottom line.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">The Downsides<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">So
far it seems easy – write a few pages, join some websites, and you get up to
$2.4 million. These awards are competitive - there are many others applying,
and your application is only one of many other worthy contenders. NIH Phase I
submission success rate averages around 15 to 20%. Phase II averages around 30
to 40%, and<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>there is no guarantee you
will be in that pool. An excellent idea with a top notch team and a well
written proposal will put you above that average, but you are unlikely to be
there on your first application. When I work with companies writing SBIRs, I
advise them to<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>consider them for the
long term, and that several attempts will be needed before they succeed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">As
with anything new, the first proposal you write will take some time. Just the
administrative preparation can take a few weeks,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>as you work with various websites and develop
the company boilerplate sections, key member bios, and learn budgeting methods.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You’ll also need to write compelling research
and commercialization plans. Companies should expect to invest about 6 man
weeks into writing their first SBIR proposal (apart from the administrative
setup), 2 weeks into the next, and a week every one after that. As the business
minded among you are calculating, it does not make sense to have one of your
most important staff members spend 6 weeks for a 20% chance of $150k – but if
you are in for the long haul and assume this is going to continue over years,
then it quickly shifts to being worthwhile. Over time, you will learn not only
how to write SBIRs but when to apply and which ones not to. Ultimately, you can
get to the point where a few days' work on a well targeted application gets you
a >50% chance of success.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">After
receiving the award, you are subject to Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR),
which require careful financial tracking and reporting and limits how you can
spend your funding. It is not a pot of money that can be used any way you want,
but a well-run company with good accounting should have no problems meeting
FAR.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">While
the federal government will always pay, sometimes it takes time for federal
payments to arrive, or for contracts to be renewed. This can leave periods
where your company is left without income but still has employees. While
agencies try to minimize this, it is a concern. If possible, try to maintain
sufficient revenue or cash in your company to pay staff during these uncertain
times.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">The Upsides<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">There
are several upsides beyond “up to $2.4 million of non-dilutive funding”. The
agency is a customer, giving you input and feedback as you develop, and may
ultimately be a source of revenue. This third party endorsement proves to
others your idea and team have merit, and if you are raising money from other
sources, helps validate you.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Even
if not initially successful, the process of creating the research and
commercialization plans often focuses a company on where they are and where
they need to go I’ve often found that this is the first time a company has laid
out a formal plan for their technology and business. Further, the reviews
returned can be eye opening as to what other experts feel are the strengths and
weaknesses of your approach, and can direct future improvements. Of course, there’s
always the chance that “Reviewer 2” is simply an idiot who doesn’t appreciate
your genius, but that’s been grant applications throughout history!</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">One
often forgotten benefit of SBIRs is that because they are competitive, if you
have won one in a particular field, you have now met the competitive
requirement in any such federal contract, so it can be a rapid way to beat your
competition to the punch.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Writing a Successful Application</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span>Beyond
having an excellent idea and a great team that meets the need of a federal
agency, how do you write a good application? When writing my own, the first
thing I think is that I’m not writing a report, I’m telling a story. I’m
leading a reviewer on a journey so by the end they know this proposal </span><i>needs</i><span> to be funded. I start with a title
that combines an obvious and important problem and solution, and catches the
eye and makes them want to read the first paragraph. The first paragraph
conveys the core of the proposal over and makes them want to read the rest of
the first page. Then I have the rest of the first page to make it obvious that
this is the solution that’s needed. That first page is critical. The rest is
only showing that you have the background and team to make this work, and </span><i>not</i><span> giving them a reason to doubt you.
Have people you trust outside your company read your first page, and find out
what excites them and why, and build that feedback into the next draft.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Keep
the proposal simple and targeted. A straightforward application that picks one
clear goal is easier to explain but more importantly does not give “targets”
for reviewers to pick on and make negative comments. Remember that when you are
up against other good applications, one small criticism may cause the agency
review panel to pick another awardee over you.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Lastly,
remember these are reviewed by experts who are volunteers. They have day jobs
and this is usually done at midnight after a long day working. Make it easy for
them to read. Use large font, short paragraphs, lots of figures and bullet
point lists so they don’t have to work to understand your genius. Remember,
nobody likes opening a document to see 10 pages of nine point font!</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; line-height: 115%;">Summary<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The
SBIR program is a great way of accessing millions of dollars of non dilutive
funding, feedback from experts, and gaining a prospective customer. It involves
a lot of upfront work and discipline, but a consistent approach can yield a
significant benefit to your company.</span><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><o:p style="font-size: 12pt;"></o:p></span></span></p>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-69050254781546313582021-04-29T22:21:00.008-07:002021-05-03T21:58:44.882-07:00Talking to Journalists<div style="text-align: justify;">Something I learned in the early days of writing this blog is "how to talk to journalists", and so I thought I'd do a post on it partly to remind me in future when I forget.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">First thing - you do not have to talk to them. If you are uncomfortable, then don't. For the most part, they need you more than you need them. If you don't speak to them, you are exactly where you were prior and you carry on with your day to day life - but they don't have a story (or a weaker one) and those things they need. So - again - if you don't want to, just don't talk.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Journalists are not your friend even if they are friendly. They have a job to do, and you're a source of information for them in getting that done. It doesn't mean they are hostile or out to get you, but don't speak to them like they're a friend. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Remember that like in any profession there are good ones and bad ones. Most I've spoken to were professional, checked all pieces of information given, went to multiple sources, and tried to make sure they were writing a good story. Some clearly didn't care. Before you talk to them go look up their previous articles, the publications they work for, and see if they are well written pieces and reputable publications. If you don't like how they write, don't speak to them or do so very very carefully.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Choose your words with care, they might end up on the front page of a national paper. Pause, think, and imagine what someone you don't know will read into your words, including future employers.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Email is also a good approach to communication - you have time to think about your answers and edit, and in the end there is no question of what you did or did not say. Journalists seem to prefer voice communication though, at least in initial discussions.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Also remember that anything you say can and may be used in their story with attribution, even if you say "this is on deep background" and then tell them something. They have to agree to that <i>before</i> you tell them something, otherwise they are under no obligation to do so. So, if you want to do the "off the record" thing, get that clear agreement first, (possibly in an email), and also make sure you understand what the terms actually mean. <a href="https://blog.chrislkeller.com/aps-guidelines-for-off-the-record-background/">Taking from Associated Press definitions</a>:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div><i><b>On the record (Default): </b>The information can be used with no caveats, quoting the source by name. </i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i><b>Off the record:</b> The information cannot be used for publication.</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i><b>Background: </b>The information can be published but only under conditions negotiated with the source. Generally, the sources do not want their names published but will agree to a description of their position. AP reporters should object vigorously when a source wants to brief a group of reporters on background and try to persuade the source to put the briefing on the record. These background briefings have become routine in many venues, especially with government officials.</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i><b>Deep background:</b> The information can be used but without attribution. The source does not want to be identified in any way, even on condition of anonymity.</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i>In general, information obtained under any of these circumstances can be pursued with other sources to be placed on the record.</i></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I've sometimes taken the approach of <i>"I'll speak to you on Background, where you can describe me as 'a person familiar with the company'. If you want a quote attributed to me, I'll consider and send you it in email"</i> because I want control on what my name is attached to. I've found most good journalists agree to this or something similar. Ones who are looking more for hits than a solid story drop you quickly - I'm not sure if that's because this makes more work for them, or because it signals they are dealing with someone who knows the game.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you think a Non Disclosure Agreement applies to anything you are talking about, then you really, really want to talk to a lawyer first. If the lawyer says it does apply, then you do not talk unless you want to risk a lawsuit. If you still think you need to talk to them, then ask your lawyer for advice on how to do so. If in doubt, just don't. And if you can't afford a lawyer for an hour (~$500) then you can't afford a lawsuit and need to stay quiet. Similar rules apply if you are speaking regarding a person with deep pockets or access to a lot of someone else's money, even if there is no NDA, as they can still cause a lot of pain legally. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you've signed a government secrets act and this applies, then be prepared to go to jail for a very long time. Seriously, just don't risk this one.</div>StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-33007749588809716132019-12-20T09:29:00.002-08:002021-05-04T08:43:11.102-07:00uBeam (Sonic Energy) Gets Another CEO<div style="text-align: justify;">
Merry Christmas everyone. It's been an insane last few months for me personally and professionally, and I've just not been able to post anything. I'm aiming to change that starting next month (<i>edit May 1 2021, that didn't work out so well, <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2021/05/quite-18-months.html">more like 18 months</a></i>), but for now here's a short post on uBeam (now Sonic Energy, not at all trying to clean up their terrible Google search history...)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://sonicenergy.com/ubeam-has-become-sonicenergy/">A press release on the company website</a> now lists <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/will-kain/">Will Kain</a>, formerly uBeam board member and Acting CFO, is now the Acting CEO. <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/01/ubeams-ces-2019.html">Previous CEO, Simon McElrea</a>, didn't quite make it to his one year anniversary and has departed for reasons unknown, but to leave without an actual CEO in place always causes a raised eyebrow.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From the release:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Will Kain, Board Member and Acting CEO, has announced that uBeam Inc. is officially changing its name to SonicEnergy™, effective immediately. The new name is being implemented across the company and should be completed by year’s end.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Kain explains that the new name better reflects the evolving focus of the company, adding “This is an exciting time with the exploding IoT market and resulting opportunity for wireless power. This name change reflects both the evolution of the company as well as its vision for the future focused on IoT, and our expanded B2B partnerships.” He continues “As a company with its roots in ultrasonic technology, we have been planning this name change along with other strategy changes for some time. With our upcoming participation at CES in Las Vegas in January, this is the perfect time to refine our image with a new, more relevant name.”</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Along with this name change, a newly redesigned company logo has been revealed and a new website at www.sonicenergy.com prominently features the company’s focus on their newly-developed 2.0 technology platform and the dynamic team behind it. The company’s ownership and staff have not changed as a result of this name change.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>"expanded B2B partnerships"?</i> I'd like to know if they even have a single one. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>"staff have not changed"?</i> Hard to change the staff when 50% were laid off in June and several have left since. Try going through the page on LinkedIn for staff at uBeam, it's several pages before you find more than one or two not "formerly uBeam", and even then I know some of them have left. The technical team left, IMO, is just enough to keep the smoke machine going.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/01/ubeams-ces-2019.html">So a CEO who replaced an Acting CEO</a> <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/08/perry-out-at-ubeam.html">who replaced a cofounder/CEO</a> who may have been pushed instead of jumped, is now being replaced in less than a year by another Acting CEO who is a money and not tech guy, <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/11/ubeam-is-now-sonic-energy-and-raising.html">just as they are doing a massive down round raise</a>. Hmmmm, really not a good look there.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That it's a finance guy really does point to the tech side being sidelined and that it's now an operation just to sell this thing to a greater fool, IMO. My opinion is that greater fool is unlikely to be a company with deep pockets and any sense, there's just nothing there - no useful hardware and the IP portfolio is not strong - and so I'd expect them to go to the "greater fool of last resort", the general public. I'm expecting to see them attempt to IPO and pull an Energous (I'm hearing Ossia is trying similar), and a CFO type is exactly who you'd want for that role. If it's not that, then the other explanation is "Downround failed, CEO exits, CFO steps up to liquidate the company".</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's it, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to everyone.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-27075633700187530152019-11-03T10:04:00.000-08:002019-11-03T10:06:25.801-08:00uBeam is now Sonic Energy - And Raising a Down Round<div style="text-align: justify;">
Last we left uBeam they'd <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/06/ubeam-lay-off-around-half-of-employees.html">laid off half their staff </a>and co-founder <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/08/perry-out-at-ubeam.html">Perry had left entirely</a>. In the last few days, uBeam has rebranded themselves as "Sonic Energy" (though apparently has some difficulty in spelling their name correctly, continuing the stellar performance we've come to expect from their marketing department). I'm guessing uBeam is something of a problem in Google searches on the company, I wonder why. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXvNpJglVVB-nJ4I1Lgy3mX99DRDwwID3B-uXDLZZtodOl93NKT7zAZVWR7cvENLywb6mYoVvMrFDtsmbqj6SjwTAuFX8eJFrnWb5UgUofgzvtUZ5UpGimHl8JRWxUBRd8yb4pn-92KAg/s1600/Screenshot_20191029-171332.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="800" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXvNpJglVVB-nJ4I1Lgy3mX99DRDwwID3B-uXDLZZtodOl93NKT7zAZVWR7cvENLywb6mYoVvMrFDtsmbqj6SjwTAuFX8eJFrnWb5UgUofgzvtUZ5UpGimHl8JRWxUBRd8yb4pn-92KAg/s400/Screenshot_20191029-171332.png" width="200" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But importantly, they're raising a new round (calling it a Series 1, which is new to me, it's really a massive down round Series C), led by Upfront Ventures (Lead in the Series A and B) again alongside OurCrowd (convertible note inbetween A and B and possibly in the B). They are looking for up to $7.5m at a pre-money valuation of $20m (about 27% of the company to the new investors), which compares to the estimated $120m to $140m post-money valuation after their Series B. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's most certainly a <a href="https://www.cooleygo.com/down-round-financings/">down round</a>, where the valuation is lower in a later round, and has serious consequences for wiping out existing shareholders - which is particularly interesting as I believe the major shareholders getting taken down are Upfront, OurCrowd, and Perry herself. Are two of those three taking major write-downs in their prior investment, just to regain it with the new investment? Doesn't that mean they are putting money in to end up exactly where they are now (or perhaps worse)? Unlikely that this will be happening - more likely is that the Preferred stock holders, Upfront and OurCrowd, will have some anti-dilution terms in their agreements and will maintain their existing % ownership as well as add the new %. Perry, no doubt, will be reduced from what I think was the single largest shareholder to a minority shareholder, a point probably not lost on Upfront and OurCrowd. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To me it's telling that across multiple major funding rounds it really has only been Upfront and OurCrowd (crowdsourcing) that have been seen to invest. No other institutional investor or strategic with strong due diligence capabilities have taken a stake in the 5 years since the Series A, which if it were the billion dollar idea claimed and just on the verge of explosive growth I think we'd see. Can't the amazing VCs at Upfront persuade some of their other big VC buddies to participate, why rely on crowdfunding and small investors? So right now it seems to me the only people willing to invest are those with a financial incentive to ensue ongoing funding (ideally from others) and those who have no due diligence capabilities.<br />
<br />
It's also interesting that OurCrowd are back in for another round - they are hardly touting the success of the Series B investment, and appeared to have taken that off their site.<br />
<br />
Where are uBeam/SonicEngery going with this? I expect the narrative the company is putting out is that they have a solid technology at developer kit level, IP to back it, a revamped team and company, and building relationships with key partners - and suggesting to investors this is a quick "in and out" and the company will be sold in a couple of years. If the developer kit was so amazing they'd be showing it off a lot more publicly, and other large VCs would not be allowing crowdfunders to take a slice of this future growth. In my opinion, the exercise for the CEO is as it has always been - put lipstick on this pig and get it sold to a greater fool.<br />
<br />
My advice to anyone thinking of investing again at this stage - don't be that greater fool.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Perry's Future</u></b><br />
And what is former CEO Perry doing? Seems like it's brain/machine interfaces with Elemind, based in Boston, and "next generation wearable neurotechnology". Over a year ago she had tweeted about something that allows you to fall asleep at the touch of a button, I wonder if this is it?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibMhRyf8gnejEST_NJ1KlkVxRHtxkTXVMk10hQfc-yf4QToK-EaCGv16Qg8fpukdAwaAsGjiXahoNtgLSRwxWXHcPuf1FtcT-nmz-3mA8N11AoWnnoRM3C-lxTJpgkW5a_9xsXoClfBRA/s1600/Screenshot_20191024-152707.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="800" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibMhRyf8gnejEST_NJ1KlkVxRHtxkTXVMk10hQfc-yf4QToK-EaCGv16Qg8fpukdAwaAsGjiXahoNtgLSRwxWXHcPuf1FtcT-nmz-3mA8N11AoWnnoRM3C-lxTJpgkW5a_9xsXoClfBRA/s400/Screenshot_20191024-152707.png" width="200" /></a></div>
She had pictures of herself with Marc Cuban in June, so perhaps this funding well has not run dry for her? It doesn't seem to be a company she founded, so has been brought in as a CEO, perhaps as the source of the funding contacts. Maybe, finally, she can use this as the vehicle to give those pesky engineers the finger the way she has always wanted to.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqEsTv7mZeH9nFI90Y0seOLLddTQQgolz_ZFpItO3fDuISQX_V5b6S0NZxFMlTdgs4LQfNu170D-hUO0wyNO4p-js3ZovTyMNLzXfakwJf8pAzlupU123pMbzHd9KEs0ksf2PadNZ7sVQ/s1600/PerryCuban2.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="606" data-original-width="582" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqEsTv7mZeH9nFI90Y0seOLLddTQQgolz_ZFpItO3fDuISQX_V5b6S0NZxFMlTdgs4LQfNu170D-hUO0wyNO4p-js3ZovTyMNLzXfakwJf8pAzlupU123pMbzHd9KEs0ksf2PadNZ7sVQ/s320/PerryCuban2.PNG" width="307" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<u><b>Text of Series 1 offer:</b></u></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>OurCrowd is reinvesting in uBeam (which recently rebranded to SonicEnergyTM) in an up-to-$7.5M Series 1 recapitalization round led by Upfront Ventures, a leading Los Angeles-based VC with investments in companies such as Bird (recently valued at $2.5B by Sequoia), Goat (recently raised $100M from Footlocker) and Ring (acquired by Amazon for over $1B).</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>uBeam seeks to deliver Always-On Wireless EnergyTM at a distance, utilizing ultra-safe ultrasonic technology to deliver reliable, wire-free charging. uBeam has developed proprietary transducers, transmitters, receivers, and custom enterprise software. The company plans to deliver wireless power to a wide range of electronic devices in the high growth Internet of Things (IoT) sector, including automotive, aerospace, healthcare, industrial and home.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i> Listen to a webinar with Simon McElrea, uBeam's CEO, and Jon Medved, OurCrowd CEO and Founder, to learn more about uBeam:</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>ubeam iii webinar</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Wireless Charging Market</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>While the wireless charging market is growing at a CAGR of over 40% and expected to reach ~$21B by 2023, it remains largely untapped due to current technological limitations with induction-based charging methods and many power-at-a-distance technologies being limited by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). uBeam claims that it has a patent-protected ultrasound technology that is FCC approved and safely transmits wireless power at a distance. IHS Markit also forecasts that by 2030 there will be 125 billion electronic devices that will need safe and always-on power. The largest vertical in this growth market is in IoT (smart home, aerospace, automotive, healthcare, commercial, etc.). uBeam is focused on this space, having already secured POCs with three global tier-1 Original Equipment Manufacturers in the aerospace and electronic device verticals, while also working to provide software and support, enabling potential partners and clients to monitor and run large networks of wireless energy.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Funding</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>With 16 employees, primarily in R&D, the company believes that, upon completion of this Series 1 raise, it will have runway through the first half of 2021, when it hopes to start generating over $6M dollars in annual revenue. During this period, the company plans to continue engaging with high volume manufacturing partners to scale the product while delivering on customer milestones and expanding its IP portfolio.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>OurCrowd is working with Upfront Ventures to help finance the company through its current business pivot from mobile phones to the IoT space. The current recapitalization round offers investors the opportunity to finance a deep technology company with $40M of historic capital already injected, but at a $20M pre-money valuation.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Team </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Simon McElrea, CEO – Simon replaced Meredith Perry as CEO at the beginning of 2019. Before joining uBeam, Simon served as CEO of Semblant, a UK and Silicon Valley based B2B nanotechnology company specializing in the protection of IoT, automotive and consumer electronic devices. Prior to Semblant, Simon was Vice President of IP, Licensing and Marketing at Energous, a wireless-charging company that completed its successful IPO in 2014. Simon has also held a series of technology commercialization leadership roles at Amkor Technology (Nasdaq: AMKR), Honeywell (NYSE: Hon) and Johnson Matthey Electronics (LON: JMAT). An author of over 30 US patents, Simon holds Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees, with honors, in Engineering Science from Oxford University.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Will Kain, CFO - Will Kain, who joined uBeam as a Board Director and CFO in June 2019, has spent the last 12+ years in leadership positions with early-stage energy and water technology companies. In addition to his duties at uBeam, Will is currently Principal and CFO at Rusheen Capital Management, an early growth-stage private equity firm investing in energy and sustainability technologies. Will started his career with UBS Investment Bank in New York, after earning his BA in Economics and Government from the University of Virginia.</i></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-66879044486057929812019-08-22T00:13:00.002-07:002021-05-04T09:50:40.718-07:00Perry Out at uBeam<div style="text-align: justify;">
uBeam cofounder and ex-CEO, Meredith Perry, recently updated her LinkedIn profile to show that not only was she was no longer in either of those roles as of September 2018 (or was it May 2018?), she is now no longer a board member at uBeam as of this month.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJFasjDhJ6vYpObsFzHlvNw9MvmNNgEb8dvKUO5DElV2gUYs-wKmcCMCElnbF25_KiZdkCRp8-dwEExV5Mqye4p3eHjMOB5zKmYKxjd0L1nm_m9Bo2vIyvB3ZKUTOpguvysoIxDeCfbDc/s1600/ECfx06QUYAAVzag.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="390" data-original-width="724" height="215" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJFasjDhJ6vYpObsFzHlvNw9MvmNNgEb8dvKUO5DElV2gUYs-wKmcCMCElnbF25_KiZdkCRp8-dwEExV5Mqye4p3eHjMOB5zKmYKxjd0L1nm_m9Bo2vIyvB3ZKUTOpguvysoIxDeCfbDc/s400/ECfx06QUYAAVzag.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For someone who controls a pretty hefty amount of stock in the company, it's hard to be removed from the board. So resigned? Pushed? Founded her new venture and no time to do the arduous task of one 4 hour meeting per quarter? (She is asking about best banks for startups on her Twitter account, which you'd think having already done once she'd know...)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Interestingly it's almost 4 years to the day since I sat with a board member and lead investor and told him that IMO Perry was a liability and needed to take action or the company was in serious trouble. Well 4 years and near $30 million later and maybe he listened to me? :)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So how much longer does uBeam have? IMO it has to be measured in single digit months, possibly weeks as there's a new Acting CFO according to the webpage. We'll know soon enough. (Edit May 2021 - <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2021/05/its-ex-ubeam.html">it actually took around 18 more months</a>)</div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-70101941340304813812019-07-01T22:29:00.001-07:002021-05-02T09:24:01.396-07:00Wired and Qi Charge Rates for a Pixel 3<div style="text-align: justify;">
Since I've been writing about wireless charging, I thought I should do some quick tests especially after being challenged by Qi advocates that I'm being harsh on the technology. A couple of years back I tested with a phone and was getting around 2 to 3 W rate, and wasn't impressed, but it has apparently improved since then (or my data point was skewed). I took my Pixel 3 which has wireless Qi Charging, and tested with two wired and two wireless options. The phone is about 2 months old, so hard to get a better test case, and the battery is around 10 Wh in capacity. For the wired tests I used the USB C cable and adapter that came with the phone (18 Watt), then an <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B07DFGXLY4/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1">Anker 60 W PowerPort Atom PD 2</a> with a <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B071LB53PN/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1">USB C cable rated for up to 100 W</a>(about $60 worth of charging gear). For the wireless Qi I used the <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B07J2KMP4X/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1">Google Wireless Charger for Pixel</a> ($80) and an<a href="https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B0794YGLD9/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1"> LK Qi Fast Wireless Charging Pad</a> ($16). (Annoyingly the LK cable in the box only goes to a USB A, you need a USB adapter to actually plug into).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAmX-Q5t2mU-B7c9SbM0HHeHsb4j2w72-luvFXOc0umljiF8X50BGBB7XrFRcNOff4vrr4pO7zBRxjJrA_kFuByL9vKyZWoCcLEz-N-pNQE7EAtkuW90Z_ep-cG-bhfDqHkAd0AfmToi8/s1600/MVIMG_20190701_210638.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAmX-Q5t2mU-B7c9SbM0HHeHsb4j2w72-luvFXOc0umljiF8X50BGBB7XrFRcNOff4vrr4pO7zBRxjJrA_kFuByL9vKyZWoCcLEz-N-pNQE7EAtkuW90Z_ep-cG-bhfDqHkAd0AfmToi8/s320/MVIMG_20190701_210638.jpg" width="240" /></a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Google Wireless Charger (Left) and LK Fast Wireless Charger (Right)</i></div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now this was not a scientific experiment where I placed the phone on the chargers with sub-mm precision, made sure the environment was identical each time, or run multiple tests to check for outliers, so there's going to be some error here. I also didn't use any high end equipment to measure the performance, just the % battery as reported by the phone itself, and the clock, so especially early on there will be some integer related errors - however this is more as an example of what a user will actually experience, and in the end the results were pretty definitive.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyS4y8FF6blM9VElu3E_VOcg6lYf6ExDDmEt1_78H9XgUFd5UTgFGrC54IEQQ9ooP3vU4x7BpqO_dLUiB4xWPc1EVsgh1PUEmrCRIRgIR_gjgICN3gJigugHalQ51i0CnVrmz0fRXE2Jg/s1600/Charging.PNG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="473" data-original-width="767" height="246" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyS4y8FF6blM9VElu3E_VOcg6lYf6ExDDmEt1_78H9XgUFd5UTgFGrC54IEQQ9ooP3vU4x7BpqO_dLUiB4xWPc1EVsgh1PUEmrCRIRgIR_gjgICN3gJigugHalQ51i0CnVrmz0fRXE2Jg/s400/Charging.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIItKlnnvcOYONKKKrkxeY0jd8X8rtq2PdMaqm-zL9DnS72neGPhwyazxEI9PxHRUFRfFLi7fs0qVY_BFi27OFjnl9I9Tk3L6knZyBTY3YWg5UdaJKvnEBZBJ_yCFfIFz-F7LExJ3niD0/s1600/Table.PNG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="105" data-original-width="547" height="76" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIItKlnnvcOYONKKKrkxeY0jd8X8rtq2PdMaqm-zL9DnS72neGPhwyazxEI9PxHRUFRfFLi7fs0qVY_BFi27OFjnl9I9Tk3L6knZyBTY3YWg5UdaJKvnEBZBJ_yCFfIFz-F7LExJ3niD0/s400/Table.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Pixel charges faster to about 50%, then starts to slow down. The out-of-the-box wired approach gets to 50% in under half an hour, and a full charge in about 1h15min, while the more expensive wired charger takes around 35 minutes to get to 50% but then 1h46min to get to 100%, with about 25 minutes of that being the last 10%, not sure why it slowed down so much (I did look at the battery temperature, it didn't report as high). Assuming 10Wh in the battery, that means an 11W rate for the first 50% of the charge and 8W overall with the default charger, and around 8.6W/5.7W for the Anker charger. It looks like, with this one data point, that there's no point in spending the money or using anything other than the default wire charger for a Pixel 3.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For the wireless Qi approach the official Google Wireless Charger for Pixel takes about an hour to get to 50% charge, and 2h30min to fully charge, giving a 50% charge rate of ~5W and overall at 4W. I did not see the 10W fast charging claimed for a Pixel 3 - my results are a bit slower than I saw in <a href="https://gizmodo.com/googles-pixel-stand-is-a-smarter-breed-of-wireless-char-1829925295">this article</a>, which got 22% charge in 15 minutes (an effective 8.8W rate). I have a plastic case on my phone, I tried with and without the case and it really made no difference to the rate. For the LK Charger, it's 1h40min to 50%, and nearly 4 hours to 100%, for 3W charging to 50% and 2.6W to 100%. It was painfully slow, and I had to do the test a couple of times as I fell asleep while waiting and woke up the next day at 100% charge.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Unsurprisingly, wired wins, and by a lot. Up to 11W is pretty good when only a few years ago wired USB was at around 2.5W, and getting to 50% in under thirty minutes is really handy if you need to top up quickly. The charge rate with the official Pixel charger was about half, so 5W for the first 50%, but I have to say it felt adequate, and I wasn't really frustrated by the speed of charging. The LK on the other hand charged at 3W and was really frustratingly slow, and near 4 hours for a full charge. For me it seems there's a break point between 3 and 5 Watts that makes a huge difference if I'm awake, if I go to sleep it just charges overnight and it really makes no difference if it took 2 or 4 hours.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While it was adequate to charge at 5 Watts with Qi, I still found I prefer wired, as for the most part I really wasn't running out of charge during the day. Now that I was paying attention, I was finding that I'd leave home at around 8.30am at 100%, and still be at 20% charge at midnight, with some days even getting to late morning the next day before running down to 0%. I don't use GPS much, so that may help, but that's a lot of use time in a phone, so a quick wired charge in the evening while I have dinner is usually more than enough. It was kinda handy to drop the phone onto the stand, but it wasn't so good that I stuck with it consistently.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Google charger comes with a few extra features such as auto-do-not-disturb, slowly brightening lights before an alarm goes off, and photo display. I didn't particularly like these things, and found them of no value. My wife, however, did. She tried out the Google Wireless Charger for her Pixel 3 and I was quickly told I wasn't getting it back, and now it's what she uses exclusively. I got left with the LK, which sits on my nightstand and I sometimes use it if I'm going to sleep to charge overnight, but otherwise it sits idle.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, for me I'd say the Google Wireless Charger does a reasonable job, but not so good that I personally find it worth the $80. If it did 10W the marketing claims (or someone can tell me why I'm limited to 5W actual during the first 50%), then that would be different and I might be more easily persuaded. It's clear I'm not the target market though, and it was a big win with my wife - if you're not looking for the absolute fastest charging and like the additional features, the Google Wireless Charger seems a good buy. At $16, for occasional use the LK charger is adequate, but I wouldn't miss it if it were gone.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So Qi wireless charging has come along in the last few years, and for the right person, is a good choice and for the Pixel 3 go with the official Google Wireless Charger, especially if you think you'll like the features that it comes with.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i>Addendum, May 21 - Google had a sale on their chargers a while back, and at $40 each I thought they were actually worth it, and bought 2 - one for my office, one for by the bed. They're actually pretty handy. So for me it was a case of "Interesting, but only at the right price" and clearly that price was closer to $40 than $80!</i></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-69011433189491627602019-06-28T00:27:00.000-07:002019-07-06T21:05:29.774-07:00Ossia and FCC Approval<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0_9554k-Tlh95fiDEb8ZyDdkoBZxhl84zP5iNP3EkzpaGOpC_IBTJv6WVM5q1yu1v-hju34xwrkQsDcyQ0bCsfjOnb3Ihvwkxwpwa2Ro6Aos_AnETnG_bIgeqWEONfzOZ0kazv9pHeJE/s1600/ossia.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="459" data-original-width="392" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0_9554k-Tlh95fiDEb8ZyDdkoBZxhl84zP5iNP3EkzpaGOpC_IBTJv6WVM5q1yu1v-hju34xwrkQsDcyQ0bCsfjOnb3Ihvwkxwpwa2Ro6Aos_AnETnG_bIgeqWEONfzOZ0kazv9pHeJE/s320/ossia.PNG" width="273" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Earlier today (Thu 27th) the FCC published that <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/05/powercast-and-ossia.html">Ossia, the RF at-distance wireless power company</a>, had been granted Part 18 approval for their charging system. This has many similarities to the<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/12/energous-and-fcc-approval-for-mid-range.html"> Energous system that got similar approval around 18 months ago, but also a number of differences</a>. The first similarity is that it seems a lot of cost and effort to deliver very little power across an annoyingly short distance though in a more elegant manner than Energous. If you want to look up the data for yourself, you can go the the <a href="https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm">FCC OET Authorization Search</a> page and enter "Ossia" under Applicant Name. Ossia are clear in its intended application:<br />
<br />
<i>The Cota power system is intended to power sensors, actuators, small displays and other devices in a commercial or industrial environment for which changing batteries and/or connecting wires is impractical.</i><br />
<br />
So no charging your phone, or any other significant electronics, and also it seems to be for fixed receivers, not mobile.<br />
<br />
This is a large area transmitter, around 0.36m^2 (imagine a ceiling tile), and outputting 5 Watts, not that much more than a cellphone or a wireless router. For comparison, at the claimed 145 dB SPL uBeam would be emitting 100 Watts acoustic from the same area panel.<br />
<br />
Having had a little time to read the 100+ pages of data, I'll summarize the results:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<ul>
<li>Uses 2.45GHz band (12.25cm wavelength), compared to ~900 MHz used by Energous (33cm)</li>
<ul>
<li>Tries to be tightly +/-10MHz, to limit interference with WiFi?</li>
</ul>
<li>A 16 by 16 antenna array (256 total), compared to the linear 12 antenna used by Energous</li>
<li>A 60 by 60cm ceiling tile size transmitter, compared to a flat bar for Energous</li>
<ul>
<li>Means a 0.3 wavelength spacing, so good steering possible</li>
</ul>
<li>A maximum of 5 Watts emitted, compared to 10 Watts max for Energous</li>
<li>Claiming 1 Watt delivered, unclear if to the receiver or battery, possibly 500 mW to 1 Watt actual, max. Energous in the 30mW to 150 mW range.</li>
<li>Limited by a SAR of ~1.42 W/kg, compared to ~0.97 W/kg for Energous (FCC limit is 1.6)</li>
<ul>
<li>No increasing power from here</li>
</ul>
<li>Max range 1 meter, compared to 90 cm for Energous</li>
<li>Creates a more confined beam, better steering, but no "hotspot"</li>
<ul>
<li>They claim to be able to steer around objects, some viability to that claim with a large phased array and test results </li>
</ul>
<li>A 15 by 15cm receiver with unspecified output</li>
<ul>
<li>Ossia website says "meaningful power at 1 meter" but no numbers given</li>
</ul>
<li>No indication of a "keep out zone" that Energous </li>
<ul>
<li>Ossia website claims the phased array steering means it's not needed</li>
</ul>
<li>Fans on the transmitter, possibly for <strike>compute/ADC heat </strike>phase-shift electronics</li>
<ul>
<li>If 30+ Watts for electronics, efficiency is likely ~1.5 to 3.0%</li>
</ul>
<li>~10 mW CW output from the receiver, for location</li>
<li>No consumer use allowed, professional installation only and a 20cm offset from people from <a href="https://fccid.io/2AS57OSSIACOTATX201#Grant-TCB-1">transmitter</a> and <a href="https://fccid.io/2AS57OSSIACOTARX201#Grant-TCB-1">receiver</a></li>
<li>I cannot see a significant business case for this system, even at OK power the range and stationary nature limits it</li>
<li>No personalized message of congratulations from Ajit Pai, FCC Chair</li>
</ul>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
So the summary seems to be that Ossia have a larger 2D phased array at a higher frequency and so can control the beam better than Energous, transmit half the power, to a fixed receiver the size of two phones, <a href="https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/tcb/reports/Tcb731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&tcb_code=&application_id=vF7aCvj%2ByGwGn3MzMY46wg%3D%3D&fcc_id=2AS57OSSIACOTARX201">needs professional installation and never closer than 20cm to people</a>, barely enough power to charge a phone, but potentially a very low efficiency. They also cannot increase the power beyond where they are without breaching the SAR safety limit (I'd guess they scaled down to the 20mW per antenna to get under the SAR limit, and some indication they started at 40 mW per antenna). The worst case seems to be immediately behind the receiver, on page 94 of the RF Exposure report Part 2.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjigSyqbu3zNYM8icfvPWJ3mDMmy3gbByoH9qJ7J7n7yYPUAwcy4JVxlYyZGpYwf0HU7Qg_AcnFXMio3ItaatbpABnGZb-WBKkT-pJXLzgvikM_Q8usZvQXSAjT8s-xJ_7onAjZ43XLD4k/s1600/ossiafront.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="394" data-original-width="430" height="292" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjigSyqbu3zNYM8icfvPWJ3mDMmy3gbByoH9qJ7J7n7yYPUAwcy4JVxlYyZGpYwf0HU7Qg_AcnFXMio3ItaatbpABnGZb-WBKkT-pJXLzgvikM_Q8usZvQXSAjT8s-xJ_7onAjZ43XLD4k/s320/ossiafront.PNG" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Front of the Ossia Cota Transmitter Panel</i></div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Without impedance information it's hard to calculate what the power is even if we assume a<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna"> half-wave dipole</a> and multiple antenna, and know the field strengths. Obviously it's less than 5W received, they claim "meaningful power at 1 meter" but no numbers given, and no use cases such as "charge your phone" so I would guess it's starting to confirm the low power number in the high 100s of mW. (Update: <a href="https://www.cnet.com/news/no-pad-wireless-charging-tech-comes-closer-with-regulatory-approval/?ftag=COS-05-10aaa0g&utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=5d15be9ac0e5900001cb47ef&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter">This article claims</a> around 1 Watt <i>delivered</i> so I'll guess it's somewhere from 500 mW to 1 Watt at the battery, max under ideal conditions) If it were much greater than a Watt I think they'd be saying that very loudly, so ~10 to 20% efficient on receive (emitted to battery and *not* overall system efficiency, which is wall socket to battery). (These are estimates, I will reserve the right to update later! <i>Which I did...</i>) I'd be interested to see how WiFi and Bluetooth work around this, even if they have restricted to one or two of the channels.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiJUeV-ZkEKhLaCx4ZDYza_Ha0XvOQgpllqjqByoeojrvDab1iWuu3C-IikW932NrWref2T7-oNPKiw2pUvry92fVCzPW3Pd7p7G6_fdQFACV4UECXu4zIeNyakH2MY3RLTlarNwwXuCI/s1600/ossiaback.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="489" data-original-width="578" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiJUeV-ZkEKhLaCx4ZDYza_Ha0XvOQgpllqjqByoeojrvDab1iWuu3C-IikW932NrWref2T7-oNPKiw2pUvry92fVCzPW3Pd7p7G6_fdQFACV4UECXu4zIeNyakH2MY3RLTlarNwwXuCI/s320/ossiaback.PNG" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<i>Back of the Ossia Cota Transmitter Panel</i></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The receiver outputs a signal at a constant 9dBm, which is <10 mW. This is the signal that's used to determine location. Now that signal I expect gets received at up to 256 channels on the transmitter, sampled (assuming the same number as transmit), s<strike>o Analog to Digital Conversion (ADC). Sampling will likely be in the high GHz to get the phase accuracy needed. You can look at ADCs in the 10GHz+ range, <a href="https://www.analog.com/en/products/AD9213.html">such as this AD913 part</a>, and they are going to consume (say) 5 Watts per channel. If sensing/location duty cycle is 100% then that's 1.25 kW of heat just from the ADCs, and so fans will be needed. Wording in the report indicates they do this 50 times a second, so I expect a lower duty cycle, let's guess 10%? Even at 100 Watts for this with simplifications and good engineering, the system is using 105 Watts to charge ~1 Watt, so overall end-to-end efficiency is <1% which is not good.</strike> (This is not certain it's what they do, but given what I'd guess the phase delay precision requirements are to make this work, it's the most obvious solution).<br />
<br />
<u><i>Update 29th June 19.</i></u> I'm glad I left the caveat on different ways of doing things, as a conversation with a colleague who has a lot of narrowband phased array radar experience covered alternative ways of doing this. My expertise is most heavily in broadband ultrasound for medical, and applications of using time reversal have been really precise in sending back the exact same signal, not just phase shifting a CW train. It's a reminder that general engineering expertise gets you so far, but specialized knowledge is invaluable. If anyone from Ossia was reading it they were probably rolling their eyes :). Very quickly, they would expect that they use phase shifters rather than ADCs, and that they'd expect the electronics to be around 30+ Watts to do this. With distributed electronics, it's just easier to put a fan on the back rather than heatsink everything. They also estimated you'd manage to contain about 80% of the power into the beam, would have around 75% loss of power in the 1 meter propagation path, and then around 50% receive efficiency, so you'd see about 1 Watt RF at the receiver, and about 500 mW converted to usable power. Assume they do a good job, that's in line with the 500 mW to 1 Watt estimate. That would put it at around 35 Watts in to get between 0.5 and 1 Watt out, so 1.5 to 3% overall end-to-end efficiency.<br />
<br />
The compute on this to work out how to send the signal back should be pretty minimal. As an alternative to this system (barring, of course, a length of wire) I note the receiver is about a 15 x 15 x 3cm block so about 775 cm^3. At 500 Wh per L, that means around 390 Wh in a Li-ion battery that size, so anywhere from 2 to 4 weeks runtime at 0.5 to 1 Watt requirement.<br />
<br />
Why limit to 1 meter? Well with a panel 60cm across, and 12.25cm wavelength, the near/far field boundary is at around 75cm, so it gets hard to have a bounded energy region beyond about 1 meter. <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/07/more-clarity-from-new-energous-foia.html">That may be a consideration here on the regulatory side</a>.<br />
<br />
The report also makes it seem like the phased array nature of the array is used not to track a moving receiver, but to act as the safety system and try to route the signal around obstructions. Both the transmitter and receiver are likely fixed. How this is then useful in most circumstances is very questionable.<br />
<br />
I'd be interested to compare this to a modern multi-antenna wifi router with MIMO like the <a href="https://www.asus.com/us/Networking/RT-AC5300/">ASUS AC5300</a> with the firmware hacked to up the power transmitted and see what gets received. Might be a fun 1 to 1 comparison.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYlNxulx5oYedLPz9k0ackN1ACZvtA_T-Vbf8eKPOoJ9uxAIXh9wY3EGCuV3m3p2g4pT8zFkf_YQn2lL1ulXV7bEZD4hoOlaffr1Hsu1P6XYaH4LSDKEiEo4N4yO6F3Xtvo-4CgYY3ZnU/s1600/aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9VL0YvODQzNDk1L29yaWdpbmFsL3NldHVwLmpwZw%253D%253D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="640" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYlNxulx5oYedLPz9k0ackN1ACZvtA_T-Vbf8eKPOoJ9uxAIXh9wY3EGCuV3m3p2g4pT8zFkf_YQn2lL1ulXV7bEZD4hoOlaffr1Hsu1P6XYaH4LSDKEiEo4N4yO6F3Xtvo-4CgYY3ZnU/s320/aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9VL0YvODQzNDk1L29yaWdpbmFsL3NldHVwLmpwZw%253D%253D.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>What Ossia Want the Public to Think Their Tech Is</i></div>
<br />
Most of the press articles on this are pretty light reading, simply regurgitating the talking points handed to them by Ossia. <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/01/tech-journalism-fail-energous-at-ces.html">In the 18 months since Energous manipulated them, the press still fall for this approach, and it remains as frustrating as ever</a>. Interestingly, what Ossia wants them to talk about is not this system, but mythical future ones, that what they have here is "a critical first step". It's like they are embarrassed by it, even the pictures they've given out are for non-existent desktop products. This is a shame as I think the engineering team has done as good a job as could be expected, this data shows they are ultimately limited by laws of physics and regulatory safety rules - ultimately I think this is as good as it gets. It's a successful approach though, they get the press talking about phone charging even in the headlines - something that's hard to do when you can't be within 20cm of your phone... Read for yourself the similarity in articles from <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/consumer-electronics/gadgets/ossias-wireless-charging-tech-may-be-available-by-2020">IEEE Spectrum</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ossia-spigen-wireless-charging-smartphone-cases-fcc,39749.html">Tom's Hardware</a>, <a href="https://www.tomsguide.com/us/ossia-cota-wireless-charging-release-date,news-30460.html">Tom's Guide</a>, and <a href="https://venturebeat.com/2019/06/27/the-fcc-approves-ossias-wireless-charging-tech/">VentureBeat</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What's the importance of this approval? The nominal use case of charging sensors in an industrial environment IMO doesn't hold up when everything is fixed and <1m distant, a wire or large battery does the job cheaper and better. It seems to me about as important as Energous' equivalent approval from 18 months ago, good for marketing/smoke and mirrors, but meaningless if you want to charge anything.<br />
<br />
As far as I can see, <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/05/powercast-and-ossia.html">no-one has beaten Powercast yet</a> for just getting the job done without hype.<br />
<br />
<i><u>Note:</u> I posted a version of this article earlier, but wrote it late at night and realized when I got up I had made some mistakes, and didn't have time to correct, so took the article down for a few hours until I had a chance to fix. So if you think you saw it and then disappear, you are correct.</i></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-56661845077575614912019-06-25T07:04:00.003-07:002019-06-28T16:03:21.662-07:00EEVBlog Does uBeam Again<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/06/eev-blog-takes-on-ubeam.html">You may remember that EEVBlog did a great video on uBeam a couple of years ago, which if you've not seen you should go watch now (also below).</a> With the new information out on uBeam, Dave has done it again, and it's a nice straightforward description of the latest website and presentation. I encourage you to watch it if you want more accessible coverage than I write here.</div>
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/t1R9IQF0Y9s" width="480"></iframe>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The discussion of the video and business side is the first 16 or so minutes, but around 18m45s is where the more tech side of the coverage begins.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To save you going hunting for it, here's the EEVBlog uBeam debunking video from 2017.</div>
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/A8dqzVlhFkA" width="480"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<br />StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-18874851707211221362019-06-24T18:25:00.001-07:002019-06-25T23:44:53.176-07:00Yet Another uBeam Video<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/06/ubeam-promo-video.html">I posted a uBeam promotional video earlier today</a>, and a comment had a link to a presentation given by the current uBeam CEO at the OurCrowd summit a few months ago (OurCrowd were one of the larger funders for uBeam).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UG2pOe-RHj4" width="480"></iframe>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Most of it is unremarkable, with the usual marketing claims, but three slides have some interesting info - this is a post that gets reasonably technical, just warning, so a summary of my opinion of this video is:<br />
<ul>
<li>The uBeam proprietary transducers seem a variation on existing commercial devices</li>
<li>Measured surface data shows the don't perform evenly</li>
<li>They can't focus sound where they want to (2 meters target, 1.2m actual)</li>
<li>The transducers may be highly directional, limiting steering in the array</li>
<li>They will never deliver more than 1W to a phone, even under ideal conditions (10 hours to charge)</li>
<li>The transducers are 5 to 10mm thick, likely doubling the thickness of a phone</li>
<li>Estimated phone case cost - $150 minimum</li>
</ul>
At around 2:40 the slide shows the transducer with a measured response from the surface.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZCeIGogQgt2IOKJeaBXTQo61iS27-kMMob09OjkYZ-Vh80oTn_zGsUM4o12fJmS1wfA3CvysIeZaB5gLRdgkau4uWtiZFjm0nrJuObSb3mV_Luj5zRI73FgoUZV47GNvbeNqNUrBqYYs/s1600/ub1.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="280" data-original-width="410" height="272" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZCeIGogQgt2IOKJeaBXTQo61iS27-kMMob09OjkYZ-Vh80oTn_zGsUM4o12fJmS1wfA3CvysIeZaB5gLRdgkau4uWtiZFjm0nrJuObSb3mV_Luj5zRI73FgoUZV47GNvbeNqNUrBqYYs/s400/ub1.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These transducers seem to be the proprietary designs that are essentially (IMO) a variation on the standard Murata devices used in car parking sensors, with what looks to be a bar rather than a disk of piezoelectric material and then a cone shaped 'speaker' on the front. I expect the bar to be either prestressed or a bimorph layered component. The transducer diameter is large, appearing to be larger than a wavelength of sound in the ~40 kHz range, which would mean in phased array operation steering would be hard as you'd send energy in unwanted directions. The other image shows what I expect is a "heat map" of the vibrational characteristics of a single transducer in operation - where you are looking at the round face, and red indicates a lot of motion, green indicates little. If this is a magnitude map, then it indicates this transducer is not operating particularly well, as you'd want red evenly around the surface to get maximum power out for the area available. Now they may have chosen a bad result just to "throw us off" but I don't see what that would buy them, and this tells me that the transducers are, unsurprisingly, inefficient.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglF7Uk1RuHcaKaKk9S1xQQAjW0i5uXSxCYOgUp3XkqR6dGFF72mN1a-N_BOYYN3fqc7Kn3pWEiKhzb1NeGic6qmRi0uXbTeORevwTc3tKPvFH_-8Qf0dCQxulWNngLLzjihc3Pnh_eTYY/s1600/ub2.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="300" data-original-width="814" height="146" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglF7Uk1RuHcaKaKk9S1xQQAjW0i5uXSxCYOgUp3XkqR6dGFF72mN1a-N_BOYYN3fqc7Kn3pWEiKhzb1NeGic6qmRi0uXbTeORevwTc3tKPvFH_-8Qf0dCQxulWNngLLzjihc3Pnh_eTYY/s400/ub2.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The next interesting images appear at around 3:22 and seem to show data on performance (not clear if simulated or measured). Axes on the left image are hard to read but seem to show a linear reduction of power with distance, though some of the markings on the y-axis indicate it may be logarithmic. The very interesting one is on the right and says "Focused Power @ 2 Meters", which is really weird because if you look at where the peak amplitude is it's around 1 to 1.25 meters, so not particularly good targeting there if you are looking to deliver power safely. What surprises me though is that there are no grating lobes, as mentioned above the spacing means in phased array application I'd expect some beams at an angle, but it's really clean. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Two possible reasons for this - one is that the transducers are highly directional and really only send energy forward, so there's just no power at angles to form strong grating lobes - the other is that they aren't steering or focusing at all, just driving all over the elements together and letting a 'natural focus' form, same as if you had a single large vibrating plate and not many individual elements. Were would that focus? Well, from the Y-axis it looks to be a 20cm wide panel, and an approximate distance for the near-field/far-field transition peak is (width^2/(4*wavelength)) then for 40 kHz (8.6mm wavelength in air) that gives a "focal peak" at 1.16 meters - amazingly right on top of where that peak shows up in the plot. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I don't think they are focusing at all, something essential if you want to carefully target devices for efficient and safe power delivery. If they want to prove me wrong there, the same plot as the one on the right, but steered at 45 degrees up or down, and placing the focus at various depths along the Z-axis, would make it clear. Not sure if they aren't focusing because they can't, or because showing that data would be ugly, but I'd like to know.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQY2LOCpxufUJOGyRG4_-53u34NFWt7x_TNPPJY3nY98p_uKWb_1vppM95IT_CbvDkRnNj7QLLnVShvfM7j3TxiF43SS0vE2kdrTkWHxVwdZpppP944vnkK0cjfiVv_-6_CvNpoeyKRcc/s1600/ub3.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="418" data-original-width="795" height="168" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQY2LOCpxufUJOGyRG4_-53u34NFWt7x_TNPPJY3nY98p_uKWb_1vppM95IT_CbvDkRnNj7QLLnVShvfM7j3TxiF43SS0vE2kdrTkWHxVwdZpppP944vnkK0cjfiVv_-6_CvNpoeyKRcc/s320/ub3.PNG" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Last slide of interest starting at 3:59 or so, has power delivered versus distance. Now I'm skeptical of these numbers, but let's take the uBeam ones at face value (not the Next Gen ones of course, <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/06/ubeam-lay-off-around-half-of-employees.html">since they fired the entire team that would be working on them</a>). What this claims is that a phone sized object can get around 1 Watt of usable power, and given that at 145 dB a phone gets around 3W of acoustic power incident, then that implies a ~30% reception efficiency, which is impressive if they can show that (to be clear, I don't think it's that high in reality). So impressive that I'm shocked there isn't a demo that makes that clear and proves the doubters like me wrong. Hmmmm. If you notice, that implies the next gen devices would have been 2x as efficient, or near 60%, given a 145 dB limit, which is an incredible feat and humanity is worse off for us not receiving this technology. Given 'circles in squares' leads to an effective usable area of around 79% max, that's getting to the limit of what's achievable (yes, I know hex layouts are more efficient, except in finite sized areas where the perimeter is a substantial fraction of the area)<br />
<br />
More than that though, the numbers are just weird. The limit on usable power received is "Incident Acoustic Power Density x Area x Efficiency" and given the latter two are fixed, only the Incident Acoustic Power Density is the limit. That is set by the regulatory limit at 145 dB (really it's 115 dB, 1000x lower, but we're being nice) so 300 W/m^2, and the area of the transmitter. Let's say a 30 x 30 cm transmitter is used, that's around 30W acoustic transmitted and with really good focusing you can target most of that to the receiver. That means as you move further out, with a large transmitter you can maintain power at the receiver by using more transmitter area and so power received should remain constant for a period (when limited by 145dB ceiling), then dip when you run out of transmitter area to compensate for the increasing in-air losses. Indeed because of the natural focusing effect you want to be increasing the array used as you move the receiver further out. Of course, efficiency continuously decreases, and transmitter cost goes up, but that's 'hidden' in this plot. There's no reason for a plot like this not to assume a huge transmitter, so maybe they are admitting the can't steer/focus arbitrarily, or perhaps they are simplifying for the lay audience, or maybe it's just kinda nonsense.<br />
<br />
The power received here is for a phone sized object, around 0.01 m^2, but an individual transducer is around 100th of that. That implies at point blank range the max power per transducer is around 10 mW, and barely 3 mW at 2 m, under ideal conditions. Note for IoT charging, you don't get much space.<br />
<br />
Nothing on cost here - a Murata transducer in bulk is a bit under $1, so even assuming they do an awesome job and produce at 50c (doubtful, most likely they'll be more expensive), then a phone case has around 100 of these, so $50 in COGS before anything else like electronics, putting the case at $150 retail, minimum. Ouch.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, nothing surprising here, but a few extra bits of information that we didn't have before that mostly confirm our existing expectations.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-78523046644592566962019-06-24T08:21:00.001-07:002019-06-24T18:27:04.602-07:00Oor Wullie's Big Bucket Trail<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvzRCQ8S03-K8q-kZbvG2PLaDNPa8K96Ecpb__FcTu5WRn_OuruHeZ-L1Sy-oiLyzzNiH7bIMcjvCGfuU8-Rj0dkBjlXI5K2KE1YsBuTsiqt030TWwtgCfDLwxuiif8w_vDzdPNOy9VNk/s1600/MVIMG_20190616_171846.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvzRCQ8S03-K8q-kZbvG2PLaDNPa8K96Ecpb__FcTu5WRn_OuruHeZ-L1Sy-oiLyzzNiH7bIMcjvCGfuU8-Rj0dkBjlXI5K2KE1YsBuTsiqt030TWwtgCfDLwxuiif8w_vDzdPNOy9VNk/s400/MVIMG_20190616_171846.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>An Oor Wullie Statue in Candleriggs, Glasgow</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I was fortunate enough to get a week off and went back home to Scotland to visit family. Just as I was leaving, a summer long event started called <a href="https://www.oorwullie.com/">"Oor Wullie's Big Bucket Trail"</a>. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oor_Wullie">Oor Wullie</a> (Translated: Our William) is a comic strip character from newspapers (specifically DC Thompson papers from my home town, Dundee), started in 1936 and still going today. For American readers, I'm thinking the analogy may be Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg8nIGMQklzxsd-nYeEFzFHWWW3Wvs63WjQlIO3qgKR3GDpV5n2zqfNl4H15wwcuQlsA0V1b1FXhz2_Onf1DS7WDU4oO5WW6PkqO3oR92aiWTZWOH7Rr4mzL_2Xb2Y9ri4rOGLOxNIYptE/s1600/IMG_20190616_102156.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg8nIGMQklzxsd-nYeEFzFHWWW3Wvs63WjQlIO3qgKR3GDpV5n2zqfNl4H15wwcuQlsA0V1b1FXhz2_Onf1DS7WDU4oO5WW6PkqO3oR92aiWTZWOH7Rr4mzL_2Xb2Y9ri4rOGLOxNIYptE/s400/IMG_20190616_102156.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>From Dundee, with Wullie Showing layers of computer graphics, and Lemmings (studio was Dundee based) for those who remember that far back</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For the 80th anniversary in 2016, there was an exhibition of large painted statues of Wullie in Dundee, <a href="https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/no-but-would-you-like-to-feel-to-make-surea-boy-about-crown-little-hero-is-pals-with-princess-after-his-tiara-spot-checkdo-you-wear-a-crown-your-majesty/">and this summer they've gone even bigger with Oor Wullie's Big Bucket Trail with around 200 full sized statues in Dundee, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, and Inverness, and around 300 smaller ones</a>. The event aims to raise money for a variety of Scottish children's hospital charities. A variety of groups have painted the statues each with a different theme, and they are located in various parts of the cities - some are just fun, some represent Scottish historical or artistic figures, or aspects of Scottish life. Like cow parade (for those of you familiar with it), it's a fun outdoor and large scale exhibit - and it gets you walking around the towns to try and see more. <a href="https://www.oorwullie.com/">The official site is here, and there's even an app to help you cross them off your list and learn more.</a> You can also follow them on Twitter <span class="username u-dir" dir="ltr" style="background: rgb(230 , 236 , 240); color: #657786; direction: ltr; font-family: "segoe ui" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: 700; text-align: left; unicode-bidi: embed;"><a class="ProfileHeaderCard-screennameLink u-linkComplex js-nav" href="https://twitter.com/OWBIGBucket" style="background: rgb(230, 236, 240); color: #657786; font-family: "Segoe UI", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: 700; text-align: left; text-decoration-line: none !important;">@<span class="u-linkComplex-target" style="font-weight: normal;">OWBIGBucket</span></a></span> and the hashtag #OWBBT</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcW4lzApQOIUJ4fC7IBdeAKkRzfV_eqcNMb17DpeKlWTb3OwKCFPwWcu-I-lxVNG8kCGbyYRoXa2KEKN-UreV3GhyaeswDUBHnJyClPsUrOAUfaWUy7JLpQbRuQvddVh23g9Ihhyphenhyphen7Bs4Y/s1600/IMG_20190615_104626.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcW4lzApQOIUJ4fC7IBdeAKkRzfV_eqcNMb17DpeKlWTb3OwKCFPwWcu-I-lxVNG8kCGbyYRoXa2KEKN-UreV3GhyaeswDUBHnJyClPsUrOAUfaWUy7JLpQbRuQvddVh23g9Ihhyphenhyphen7Bs4Y/s400/IMG_20190615_104626.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Town center in Dundee, with the permanent dragon statue in the background</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I caught the first couple of days of it in Dundee and Glasgow, just before I left. I was up at 11pm walking around Glasgow the night before I left to get a couple more (Scotland is really far north, it's light late this time of year), but I never did find the Glasgow Green or Strathclyde Uni ones.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqVUApBb-moYEttQQKof1zIY49-zbF6gjcwoFqiYMSkn3xY2cTTXmmDLtqjsUqg2cLEneL7zpgk5vZvlFSvaMjC-3ubzVpJvCu4ela0_bavvM7ZfEoFhAgxASPe4cG2k_QjAzhSsTJbec/s1600/IMG_20190616_171715.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqVUApBb-moYEttQQKof1zIY49-zbF6gjcwoFqiYMSkn3xY2cTTXmmDLtqjsUqg2cLEneL7zpgk5vZvlFSvaMjC-3ubzVpJvCu4ela0_bavvM7ZfEoFhAgxASPe4cG2k_QjAzhSsTJbec/s400/IMG_20190616_171715.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Oor Jimi in Glasgow</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I had a few favourites for different reasons. Jimi Hendrix shows up as Oor Jimi, and given I live in Renton WA where Hendrix is buried, I liked it. Nearby was another that appealed to my childish sense of humour:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU_DZmHAGecYu1zR7Q4pk8SAKso1M_biBZIfJqL-g8f6KEdwGrkj_DXsxvsf_qvMtPIINcAhCmsAZMI9iayTFXtath_AyjV3oulQC4VqVCrdNHQtTrRPyG3XntiYcaHrJ3XwRufKfUfuc/s1600/IMG_20190616_183301.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU_DZmHAGecYu1zR7Q4pk8SAKso1M_biBZIfJqL-g8f6KEdwGrkj_DXsxvsf_qvMtPIINcAhCmsAZMI9iayTFXtath_AyjV3oulQC4VqVCrdNHQtTrRPyG3XntiYcaHrJ3XwRufKfUfuc/s400/IMG_20190616_183301.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFmd_YGzCQdDbnqUeS-KnyRMkD7nNBWpuI0Np3hW3GkTIJeUJ6zt1iRWbPteR2XRebVOWQPrLBoZUVFDY5gxhDVG5XsOTN0_qHwSgQS8Gwk9bkKzZXVJPq6CittaZN0P9TmAUhe86w_6g/s1600/IMG_20190616_183323.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFmd_YGzCQdDbnqUeS-KnyRMkD7nNBWpuI0Np3hW3GkTIJeUJ6zt1iRWbPteR2XRebVOWQPrLBoZUVFDY5gxhDVG5XsOTN0_qHwSgQS8Gwk9bkKzZXVJPq6CittaZN0P9TmAUhe86w_6g/s400/IMG_20190616_183323.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>A Whoopie Cushion Wullie in Glasgow</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/08/a-unicorn-i-can-believe-in.html">This one made me laugh, and it's another opportunity to remind people that Scotland's national animal is indeed a unicorn.</a> Next one might be my favourite of all though:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkUgy5fd3ArdcansAUIcWHt6t9ttj-qx_HDeX5AXcVvQhwZWm3urbyJXJyoP3rrTBMZQGUEUHWQG6qWvwuOI_PHPNdM9AApWDwt4VD5-3-mIYP_ZPRxhAKzIdRvQI4iW1BYCbHQ5AwccM/s1600/IMG_20190616_191331.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkUgy5fd3ArdcansAUIcWHt6t9ttj-qx_HDeX5AXcVvQhwZWm3urbyJXJyoP3rrTBMZQGUEUHWQG6qWvwuOI_PHPNdM9AApWDwt4VD5-3-mIYP_ZPRxhAKzIdRvQI4iW1BYCbHQ5AwccM/s400/IMG_20190616_191331.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixM3yLRaY7xrz6OEwIBA1zYYvCH5T7HB6-xZMiFfL-iFFjTe3UCSVG9t9pYH71Aymb3-kFAtlbfm32w98bMWwOIrpDcchzYnsPEFBJYtbHOomdudzpgXz77I1qYFTowoBuQmVwyFVL1xY/s1600/IMG_20190616_191357.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixM3yLRaY7xrz6OEwIBA1zYYvCH5T7HB6-xZMiFfL-iFFjTe3UCSVG9t9pYH71Aymb3-kFAtlbfm32w98bMWwOIrpDcchzYnsPEFBJYtbHOomdudzpgXz77I1qYFTowoBuQmVwyFVL1xY/s400/IMG_20190616_191357.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Traffic Cone Wullie in Glasgow</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I used to walk past this pretty much every day, and even tried to get up on the statue to place the cone once (and failed). It's just Glasgow. I wish I'd had a day or two more to go see the rest, it took me to a few places in the cities I'd not been to in some time, and they seemed to be getting a lot of positive attention. Hopefully it also raises a lot of money for charity in the three months or so it runs.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcn0Vm3s-ldbGX4HrbgRu91LCul5DGIcfVcrABI3a4Hq9Wdvzjw_kmgP4HC4i8vsCdiIOTEa8VndfZslpZSVA6qVZNVuQ_KjYJ-kQCzF-xtP1WL2ryWcVnLoB5Y9cRKo7aMaJ68muc7PY/s1600/IMG_20190612_183901.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcn0Vm3s-ldbGX4HrbgRu91LCul5DGIcfVcrABI3a4Hq9Wdvzjw_kmgP4HC4i8vsCdiIOTEa8VndfZslpZSVA6qVZNVuQ_KjYJ-kQCzF-xtP1WL2ryWcVnLoB5Y9cRKo7aMaJ68muc7PY/s400/IMG_20190612_183901.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3cOTphyphenhyphenNHHmw8xdJ6bHwRUjTCJeMkIKoHnUFBdqMm1vcnDrIFlEMo_ccrn3ihPlG0PyLXNqbe4iq-kd7_uyb2MWTO_ZeTPGdlGFLnhMliHeMus2g48UzY18rjA3zpYgTfglXL3GcuBus/s1600/IMG_20190612_185441.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3cOTphyphenhyphenNHHmw8xdJ6bHwRUjTCJeMkIKoHnUFBdqMm1vcnDrIFlEMo_ccrn3ihPlG0PyLXNqbe4iq-kd7_uyb2MWTO_ZeTPGdlGFLnhMliHeMus2g48UzY18rjA3zpYgTfglXL3GcuBus/s400/IMG_20190612_185441.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSejQESNm0Y67sOEW2Ur0x5BauhQfrx6f2KE_AVaj1fOwnP5VzG6S3y6W0t9nBK1kGE2D5T88Y-CrATPewhjM2tLh32JM9AhTsAot9hQDtpb_onkSslMLA0I2taPWrkwHdInAapsioe_Y/s1600/IMG_20190612_194226.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSejQESNm0Y67sOEW2Ur0x5BauhQfrx6f2KE_AVaj1fOwnP5VzG6S3y6W0t9nBK1kGE2D5T88Y-CrATPewhjM2tLh32JM9AhTsAot9hQDtpb_onkSslMLA0I2taPWrkwHdInAapsioe_Y/s400/IMG_20190612_194226.jpg" width="300" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll post a few more pictures later but one last thing, I always try and get some good Scottish food when I'm home. My dinner of choice - Cullen Skink (soup with smoked haddock, cream, potatoes), haggis neeps and tatties (turnips and potatoes, this time in a whisky cream sauce), and sticky toffee pudding. This was from the Bothy restaurant in Glasgow, and I'll be going back next time I'm home. </div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-50663127724728259752019-06-24T07:31:00.001-07:002019-06-24T08:22:11.483-07:00uBeam Promo Video<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/06/ubeam-lay-off-around-half-of-employees.html">I recently wrote about the large layoffs at uBeam</a>, and the new website, however I had missed their new promotional video that was posted on the 5th June.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LH742F25MHg" width="480"></iframe>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Similar to the website, it shows charging of phones by peoples heads (insufficient power delivery to be practical, tracking for such application never demonstrated, and IMO not safe), forklift trucks (just not even close to the power requirements there), and all the while powering huge numbers of distributed devices with a line-of-sight technology implying massive numbers of transmitters. It also has babies and animals so of course it's "ultra-safe" as it just bounces off the skin (as long as there's no hair, in which case there will be heating and possibly burns at high power, but that's just a detail) and the voice over assures us it's for any application. Hmmmmm, I smell something...</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
I will say, at least this website/promo theme isn't set in space, where sound literally cannot propagate, simply because the CEO "likes space".<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This made me wonder about the timing of the firings - that it wasn't that they had run out of money, but rather that they had finally reached the combination of Murata-style devices they manufacture themselves to be able to claim "proprietary transducers" along with sufficient marketing materials (even though IMO the "product" is absolutely not viable) they can <i>claim</i> to have something to sell. Sufficient smoke in the machine and enough mirrors there's a bit of hope a purchaser will not be paying attention? Knowing it's a dud and there's no future, did they then just deep-six the development team because they had done their job and were now simply surplus to requirements? I've said before I think their RF based rival, Energous, is a company designed to sell shares who uses engineering as their marketing, but have uBeam effectively done the same now? Quite why anyone with sense would buy into a tech that is at v0.9 and there's nobody to even provide support for the beta let alone build you a next-gen system, I do not know, but there seems to be dumb people out there with money to burn.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If true though, it's another reminder to employees - you are a "human resource" and the second you're not needed, you'll be removed no matter the impact to you. Be careful what you commit to any company, do the work you're paid for but don't forget that loyalty is a one-way street.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>When (and why) did Perry leave as CEO?</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
According to uBeam, <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/09/end-of-era-thoughts-on-ubeam-founder.html">Perry left the company in September 2018</a> to "spend more time with her next project" (9 months later, still not appeared), handing over the reigns to interim-CEO McCauley. Shortly after that <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/09/meredith-perry-no-longer-ubeam-ceo.html">McCauley updated her resume</a> to show she'd been interim CEO since July, and now <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacquelinemccauley/">it's updated again</a> to show since May 2018. Three resume changes on a date that is not really ambiguous - as Goldfinger says, once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEMIshRYGMtCUAYVD9oiPoIDuIlxyqIqB4qr43viINe2bgXiNAkv0XBZb-r-F4th2AH-8dAC1HIcdtD1R_I5jLyX8fZu2mc3g5n8ZkPlEcRgfyed3-AVRciH1CJpl5RKWOPNOTDuQz38o/s1600/mccauley.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="356" data-original-width="777" height="182" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEMIshRYGMtCUAYVD9oiPoIDuIlxyqIqB4qr43viINe2bgXiNAkv0XBZb-r-F4th2AH-8dAC1HIcdtD1R_I5jLyX8fZu2mc3g5n8ZkPlEcRgfyed3-AVRciH1CJpl5RKWOPNOTDuQz38o/s400/mccauley.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Interestingly, the COO also left uBeam in May 2018, after barely 9 months on the job. He was someone immensely qualified to do the COO role, and even the CEO role - a position most who noted his hiring expected he had been brought on for. Is there a connection and is there more to this story than meets the eye?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-18192286477610253432019-06-18T23:08:00.000-07:002019-06-24T07:33:06.237-07:00uBeam Lay Off Around Half of the Employees?<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Over the last week I've heard from a number of people as to some significant events at uBeam - last Monday the 10th June around half the employees had been laid off. No notice, no severance, no vesting, no farewell party, and the last day of employment at uBeam for them had been Friday the 7th June. The first emotion I heard from any of them was shock, that this was unexpected both in its suddenness and harshness. It seems the team that have been let go, around 13 of the 25 or so total, are most of the engineers who would have been doing actual product development (with an exception for some electronics/visualization work), as well as the product manager, so as clear a signal as possible from uBeam that there will not be a product coming from them (to no surprise for anyone who has read this blog).</span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">While founders and CEOs get the press coverage and public sympathy, it's always the regular employees that take the brunt of the pain in situations like this. Startup founders are more likely to come from backgrounds of financial stability, CEOs the last to go even if their decisions led them along this path, but your regular employees are just trying to do their job, pay the rent, and then one day they find that the paycheque, and health insurance, won't be coming. If anyone reading this blog has positions or knows of places hiring especially in the LA area in tech companies, you should look to contact them (most are on LinkedIn) or I can get you in contact for a few of them.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">While I'm hearing slightly different stories, what's consistent is that they were told the company had very little runway, a few weeks at best, and the board declined to put in more money to keep things on the current path. Rather, a drastically reduced budget was given, and half the staff had to go. Given who was let go, it seems there is no product in the future, and rather they will focus on selling, licensing, or otherwise extracting revenue from whatever IP currently exists. Tech staff that are left might be viewed as those who can make sure a physical demo actually works, and the tech people senior enough to impress potential purchasers. I personally don't see this as a route to revenue, without a product the IP has limited value, the transducers we've seen from them (called "uBeam's most critical component" in the prior fundraising round) look to follow the same basic design as the industry standard Murata type, leveraging width-mode piezo vibrations and a speaker-like cone. I can't see any advantages over the Murata, but I struggle to see them beating the leader on price, and both have sizes that are large relative to wavelength that make them unsuitable for phased array use (basically, they will send out energy in unwanted directions). In however long they have left, I don't see them selling the IP for anything above bargain basement prices (look for "for an undisclosed sum") and even that I think is a longshot. </span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5fNNZ28864tXTob2IMRU-DwcO9V-jXUqk11f2uMdH7s9Fp3ZPKdzMkvisKW77yhvB2Wj5g1xN4PbQU5E4kGOuJ3wBEmXcyePbFx9jtqLTQlByaN0_KULJwhSKX8fylW6tmtKGXHcsgOU/s1600/hex2.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="579" data-original-width="576" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5fNNZ28864tXTob2IMRU-DwcO9V-jXUqk11f2uMdH7s9Fp3ZPKdzMkvisKW77yhvB2Wj5g1xN4PbQU5E4kGOuJ3wBEmXcyePbFx9jtqLTQlByaN0_KULJwhSKX8fylW6tmtKGXHcsgOU/s320/hex2.PNG" width="318" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgK3LikwUehhQCKX8ORnmY-66daEsbKL3ZvehtWVkwtDqPYw3ASFnbS-OoSZSh4mMhQHIgOCjOJFXHL4E4T4o1qENDoIwuR2CxUzzxbejXQMfIm7Oc3MozHc8xywubjiiasz09TbCSRYBc/s1600/hexes.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="584" data-original-width="581" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgK3LikwUehhQCKX8ORnmY-66daEsbKL3ZvehtWVkwtDqPYw3ASFnbS-OoSZSh4mMhQHIgOCjOJFXHL4E4T4o1qENDoIwuR2CxUzzxbejXQMfIm7Oc3MozHc8xywubjiiasz09TbCSRYBc/s320/hexes.PNG" width="318" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">It's something of a surprise though this happened right now. The company's last raise was at the very beginning of 2018, and while numbers like $25 million were discussed, I have always felt that was a combination of the new raise and the prior convertible note round and the new money was more in the $11 to $14 million range (still not shabby!). It didn't appear uBeam hired any significant new staff (losing the CEO, COO, and CTO in 2018 while not replacing the CEO until Jan 2019), and had abandoned the production model in favour of licensing, so expenses should not have been that high. I had thought they would be halfway through the money by now, and looking at a cashflow issue somewhere between the middle and end of next year. That it happened now is very interesting and there are some possible explanations.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">I think a likely scenario is that the prior round was tranched - that is they didn't get all of it in one lump sum but rather released by the board only on completion of certain milestones. One option would be that the money would be split into 2 equal tranches with half the money needing to get them to a milestone of a product or a licensing deal. Without either on the horizon, the board may have had little confidence in the future of the company, and decided to cut losses and squeeze whatever money they can out of what is there. It's a strategy I don't think will work, I noted last year I thought the best return to investors would have been to give the staff 60 days notice, shut the company down, and hand the remaining money back to the investors. Seems an aspect of that has been followed, but regular staff apparently don't merit consideration. This does not surprise me, when I was there employees let go were terminated on the day with no severance, despite encouragement from the senior engineering side to pay at least 2 weeks - it's the right thing to do (unless the employee is let go for cause), but also goes some way to alleviating concern in the remaining employees that they can be out with no money any day, never a good situation. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Something I do wonder is if the money is tranched, whose money got spent? I was guessing that the round was pretty much 50/50 between OurCrowd and UpFront, around $6m or so each. If 50% got spent, was it split 50/50 or did the OurCrowd money go first, which would be unfortunate for the large number of individual small investors in the OurCrowd group but good for the LPs at UpFront. Or vice-versa? If anyone has any greater understanding of the situation or alternate scenarios, I'm interested to hear.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">How long have they got? I don't know, but I can't see significant money being put in so perhaps 3 to 6 months at most? It's a terrible negotiating position to be in, as any buyer knows that waiting a month will likely result in effective downward pressure on price. Morale among remaining employees will not be good and if I were them I'd already be looking for new work. It would make sense to offer them a significant bonus should they stick out a set time period, but in a cash strapped company the likely bonus isn't going to be big enough to make up for a month or two gap in income when the end comes. If my experience of the company still holds, there was never thought nor attention paid to the needs of staff, they were simply expected to do what the company required and be grateful for the opportunity. While no longer CEO, Perry will still likely have significant board presence and will need to have been at the board meeting where this decision was made. A tweet from Perry on the 5th June might indicate that's when it happened, and may signal she accepts that it's game over.</span></div>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
“It doesn’t matter how many times you fail — there’s not a limit. You only have to be right once.” <br />
-Mark Cuban <a href="https://twitter.com/mcuban?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mcuban</a></div>
— Meredith Perry (@meredithperry) <a href="https://twitter.com/meredithperry/status/1136356138855780353?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 5, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Notice no public announcement, they want to keep the pretense of a viable company going, but also no press attention either - the corporate end of uBeam may be months away, but it seems to be dead as far are press are concerned.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">It is a bit of a kick in the teeth for the new CEO who has not even had 6 months to get the company turned around. Even if it were possible (and I don't think it was by that stage) it's hard to make a turnaround in hardware so fast where that timeframe may be only one development cycle. Still, he gets to say he tried and it wasn't his fault, what could he do, and perhaps collect a healthy paycheque along the way. </span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">T<a href="https://ubeam.com/">he website had recently been updated</a>, with images showing them powering everything from tablets medical equipment, and home appliances (never going to happen) while showing pictures of babies and pets in a subliminal attempt to say <i>"We're safe"</i> along with the more overt <i>"ultra-safe"</i> marketing lines, the very carefully worded <i>"no verified risk"</i>, a claim of full regulatory compliance (hmmm, I'd love to see the paperwork there), and third party studies proving safety (let's see them then). It looks somewhat like the Energous website, seemingly not only do all the at-distance wireless power companies follow the same trend of massive performance specs at first (TVs, cars, cellphones, multiple meters, faster than a wire!), to trickle charge, to IoT, but the websites look the same as well. They had also been advertising for a Chief Revenue Officer, and that ad seems to have disappeared - either plans there were shelved or someone is in the role and had a really crappy first week. A few pictures from the website are below:</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDpyM6-MoVqt3_MFz49KiXKoN3ZwREgWdDlt854RecWcRnMdnmdT7DYuEusOxb-2oFO_s-FbVOuNWq03U-dwrEVysBnE_ZKz_7l6dL9Ta55QC-uhr5Nqip1GnNfMqz8uTOmiI-y0j7pkY/s1600/trans.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="686" data-original-width="1464" height="186" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDpyM6-MoVqt3_MFz49KiXKoN3ZwREgWdDlt854RecWcRnMdnmdT7DYuEusOxb-2oFO_s-FbVOuNWq03U-dwrEVysBnE_ZKz_7l6dL9Ta55QC-uhr5Nqip1GnNfMqz8uTOmiI-y0j7pkY/s400/trans.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhM9RL4nvfqMmjsoBFDtQOhu0YMrh-9vi4YapzuHMC_bTAdLWIwozMrnHcMfKa2c0dlllT7weKeectqOBZakQgQGqY3ng4m3NK3OkKr62OtLcaewClzMZqEdj_xoYa7YQgFlPQw1ycRLdk/s1600/Receive.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="693" data-original-width="1433" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhM9RL4nvfqMmjsoBFDtQOhu0YMrh-9vi4YapzuHMC_bTAdLWIwozMrnHcMfKa2c0dlllT7weKeectqOBZakQgQGqY3ng4m3NK3OkKr62OtLcaewClzMZqEdj_xoYa7YQgFlPQw1ycRLdk/s400/Receive.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">It's frustrating as there were things that could have been done, changes that could have been made earlier to develop technology useful in a number of areas and a total of between $25 and $40 million spent to generate IP that might sell for 2% of that, if at all. I know several hardware companies with solid products and tech where $1 to $3 million would be a massive boost for them, and ten such companies worth of initial funding just disappeared. It's a shame that the two most senior engineers didn't sit down with a board member almost 4 years ago and let know issues at the company and the likely trajectory, while suggesting possible changes/pivots to make it all viable. Though if they had they may have been treated as second class employees from then on, motives questioned, never trusted for having 'snitched' on a member of the elite...</span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b><u>Another uBeam Anecdote</u></b></span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The situation does remind me of an incident from my time at uBeam. Normally there was supposed to be a meeting with myself, the other VP Eng, and CEO Perry at 9.30 each morning, though our bet each day was on how many minutes after 9.30 we'd get a text from the PA letting us know the CEO would be late. We'd watch her walk in usually looking tired at ~9.45 and it was maybe another 30 minutes before our meeting would start (damn whatever else you might have tried to do in that time, she was there, so the meeting starts now), but she was at least teeming with energy by then. This morning in question was different. The CEO was in her office already when the other VP and I walked in, with the new CFO while super-excited and energetic. <i>"Great news"</i> she tells us "<i>My friends told me last night that Virgin Galactic is going out of business!"</i>. We look at each other knowing it was going to be one of those mornings, and could see where this was going. Perry was a self-described space-nut and was always trying to get us to hire people from Space X or similar, even though we kept telling her that the typical skillset was vastly different between companies. And so it came - <i>"We can hire all their engineers!"</i> and trying to head things off we immediately tried <i>"That's interesting we can have recruiters try to target the likely employees"</i>. Perry scoffed at our feeble engineer approach, and informed us she would be mailing the CEO himself to find out who to hire, showed us the email, which read (and while from memory is confirmed with the other attendee, is pretty close)</span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><i>"Dear [VG CEO]. I hear that your company is going out of business. Can you tell me who your best engineers are so I can hire them?"</i></span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Now we were in a fix. We couldn't let this go out, but neither could we tell Perry this was a dumbass idea, an insult to the VG CEO, and impractical for us, as any attempt to indicate she may be on a non-optimal path almost always resulted in the <i>"I'm the CEO"</i> response where she had to "show leadership" by not changing and instead doubled down (our eternal Catch 22). These situations were tricky and so at first tried the <i>"If true he would have bigger issues let's give him a few days"</i> line in the hope we could delay enough she'd forget and move onto something else, but no, she clicked send. The whole conversation was between 5 and 10 minutes maximum, and like many things at uBeam we could see the action being taken that would result in predictable (to us) consequences hours, days, months down the line and nothing we could do about it.</span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Later that day we asked if there had been a reply, and amazingly there had been. The response was (and again, from memory) <i>"Dear Meredith, VG is not going out of business, in fact we recently raised a significant financing round. Please inform whoever told you this that it is not true and ask them to stop spreading the rumour"</i>. Perry just shrugged and carried on as if nothing had happened, and to be fair that type of bizarre event was pretty much the norm at uBeam. </span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">So I chortled to myself when thinking of this and imagined sending the email <i>"Dear former-CEO Perry. I hear that your company is going out of business. Can you tell me who your best engineers are so I can hire them?"</i> I'm sure she'd understand.</span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">But back to the most important point - if you want to hire solid engineers, there's a few looking for a solid employer right now.</span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><i><u>Update:</u></i> I wrote a brief update and link to the promo video that matches the website <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/06/ubeam-promo-video.html">here</a>. It also asks when co-founder and former CEO Perry actually left the company.</span></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-7294270258760823472019-05-26T22:08:00.001-07:002019-05-28T17:33:16.837-07:00State of Wireless Charging in May 2019<div style="text-align: justify;">
I have to apologize for the low rate of postings - basically I'm slammed with work, personal ventures, and home/family. I'd like to be writing more, and talking about what I'm doing, but that's just not going to happen for a while. Hopefully more at the end of the year, but for now I'll use the long weekend to try and get at least a couple of articles done.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>AirPower and Qi</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/04/wireless-charging-in-2019.html">My last article on wireless charging</a>, noting the disappointment of AirPower and PiCharging (Spanse), got some mixed responses. Some industry insiders were not pleased with my portrayal of Qi as limited, and suggested that if I were to review a premium phone with the associated official charger that I'd have a different opinion. I agree that in a perfect world Qi can achieve some reasonable charge rates, however my hope for AirPower was that Apple removed the need for consumers to worry about positioning and would make it a seamless experience. Just "drop and go" and it's charged when you pick it up an hour or two later - but they couldn't do so. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The problem isn't Qi's performance under ideal conditions, it's that if you need the ideal setup, a premium phone, and the expensive charger, then many users get a sub-par experience and then that experience taints things from there on out. You don't want consumers to think it's pointless? Give them a great experience first time out, and then that becomes the expectation and when there's a cheap knock-off charger that's $50 cheaper but charges at 1 W not 7.5 W they blame the cheap charger, not Qi. Let there be a tainted ecosystem where for years it's a crap shoot how things go then the standard gets blamed instead.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The reality of things is that consumers are dumb, and will take the cheapest and laziest route on everything. For example, I went to Amazon and typed "wireless charger Pixel 3" and I see the official Google wireless charger for ~$80 (4 star review) and an LK charger for $16 (4 star review). I understand this stuff and can't tell what the difference is, the average person has no chance. I have no idea if LK is any good or not, but is it 5x better than the Google? That's the price point most people expect, and are going to have a hard time justifying that extra $64. Now does that $16 charger work fast and well, or does it fail to charge due to positioning on a regular basis, or charge slowly? (I'll try and let you know in a few days, I just ordered it) If it fails on even a couple occasions and you lose phone use during the day because it didn't charge overnight then people start to default back to "just plug in with the wire that came with the thing". For the Pixel 3 that wire is an 18 W charger, and that's noticeably fast.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So can Qi be great when all is good with the setup? Yes. But if a consumer has to know the exact setup to use to get that then the $16 base unit sets the expectation, not the $80 one.<br />
<br />
<i><u>Update 28th May 2019:</u></i> A reader tells me <i>"The reason it (the Pixel Stand) costs $79 is not because it charges faster or with more placement forgiveness than some 3rd party charger like LK (although it does offer a proprietary 10W mode, so it should charge a Pixel3 somewhat faster than LK). Rather, the 'Google Screen' feature is why it is priced very high. You need to use the Pixel 3 phone to unlock this feature, but it is really cool, IMHO... To simply take some Samsung or Apple phone and compare its charge rate on the Pixel Stand vs. the LK and obviously conclude that it is not worth the extra $64 is a waste of time and misleading."</i> Seems a fair point, and I do have a Pixel Stand on the way too, I'll compare them in more than just the charge rate. Still, I had no idea there were even such features in the stand so I think my point on poor marketing of what may be excellent features stands!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It was also pointed out to me that what I was saying about the frequency of operation didn't make too much sense, which on rereading was a fair point. What I wanted to say came over badly, and there was no easy way to fix it, so I deleted it. Thank you for that feedback those who sent that comment.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Pi/Spanse and Qi</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So this was the more interesting one, it seems. I had pointed out that I had thought Pi would be a success in part due to the use of the existing infrastructure of the inbuilt Qi charger, but that I was now confused as they talked about the need for a proprietary charging case didn't go down well with users. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When I had written <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/09/wireless-at-distance-charging-may-be.html">the first Pi article</a>, I'd seen the<a href="https://www.sigmobile.org/mobicom/2015/papers/p2-shiA.pdf"> original paper</a> on the technology working at 6.78 MHz, and spoken to a couple of people I knew and trusted who had connections to the company and the answer came back "yes they shifted to 140 kHz". I also emailed the founder and specifically asked this question though didn't get a response (should have raised a flag there). I then went on to write the article based on that, and there's a lesson here for me in not believing something until I've seen it in verified. I think someone should start a blog about that...</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_dPCATC6kSfuuYEFa_eJPjmfbrgueQLTLXuK2M8TDXg0kgkVQ_XmM2Vob27cxIotEJ9YIojTO41MaTR5Af8KLQjEypjoKrbYW6DwdY947hfRjpTuTQBTH_juA70IYnfUSjrqKbX3pCO8/s1600/spanse.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="884" data-original-width="1426" height="247" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_dPCATC6kSfuuYEFa_eJPjmfbrgueQLTLXuK2M8TDXg0kgkVQ_XmM2Vob27cxIotEJ9YIojTO41MaTR5Af8KLQjEypjoKrbYW6DwdY947hfRjpTuTQBTH_juA70IYnfUSjrqKbX3pCO8/s400/spanse.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Well suspicions now seem to be confirmed. <a href="https://www.spansive.com/shop/source">If you go to Spanse's website</a> you can see the "Source" that they are now essentially selling is a large Qi charging station that works with up to 6 devices and thick cases, for $189. Sure you get wifi for updating and a USB port for wired charging, but I've already got that in my laptop, or a wall socket, for a lot less. Now personally I don't have 6 devices that need charged, and I'm wondering if it's 12 times better than that LK charger I just ordered. It seems a bit large for bedside table use, so is it aimed at a kitchen table for a family, or an office? The generic image above shows it charging an iPad, but look closely and you'll see the iPad is wired charging, and given either the wall socket the Source is plugged into, or the laptop nearby, could have done it I'm struggling to see the clear use case. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Importantly, the at-distance part is gone. What exactly happened is unclear, but rumours seem to be that the near-contact Qi charging was conflated with the at-distance charging that would need a proprietary case and a higher frequency. People I've chatted with who have some connections call it an honest mistake and miscommunication, but if true then I'm calling bullshit on "honest mistake" when the key aspects that made this interesting happen to not be true. Everyone knew what people wanted, and it was the convenience of modest charge rates at a modest distance, with pre-existing charging infrastructure. Add in the requirement of a new expensive case, and it's just another also-ran.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Ossia</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/05/powercast-and-ossia.html">Ossia</a> (wireless charging with RF, very similar to Energous) <a href="https://venturebeat.com/2019/05/16/ossia-teams-up-with-t-mobile-to-pilot-wirelessly-charging-asset-trackers-in-walmart-warehouses/">announced a deal for wirelessly charging IoT asset trackers in Walmart warehouses</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>...guards and associates will wirelessly power the asset trackers at warehouses’ guard shacks, ensuring the trackers are charged before they’re attached to incoming trailers, crates, pallets, and packages.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While the wording in the article seems to be ambiguous and points to also charging the handheld devices the employees use, I expect that fundamentally this is using their 2D array to locate and charge the small low power trackers that go on boxes and pallets in warehouses. Given that active RFID work at up to around 100 mW in short bursts (from recollection), a high microWatt, low milliWatt source that saves employees a minute on each tag across thousands of tags will be economically viable. From what I've seen, this is basically Powercast's business model and they've been out there for years quietly serving the market without the fanfare or exaggeration of Ossia or Energous.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Interestingly the Ossia VP interviewed talks about the "proof of concept" which makes me wonder if this is just a demo for Walmart and not an actual sale/rollout. Regardless, this very low power, intermittent need, in an industrial facility, which is the kind of thing that wireless power at-a-distance is actually suited for. It's one of the reasons all the companies talk about charging your phone fastert than a wire at multiple meters, but then move to "trickle charging" and then IoT, and then eventually out the consumer space entirely. All of them. No surprise, it's where they all inevitably go after having exhausted all the alternatives (and investor money).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Energous</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Very briefly on Energous - I wondered if they would make their raise given the price of the stock, but it seems they did raise a further $25m from stock, and so now have cash to make it to early Q1 2020 assuming no reduction in staff or compensation. (I was told they had trouble selling that, cancelled the first offer and tried again, and ended up getting it from a short seller group, which is ironic. I have no confirmation on this, so take it with a pinch of salt) This still isn't enough to see them to revenue, given their own statements as to even the best case for products, so we'll be back here at the end of the year with the same thing again. We're also still waiting on any products with "WattUp" in them, such as the hearing aids (<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/12/energous-product-announcement-wheres.html">sorry, PSAPs</a>) that were promised in no more than 90 days about a year ago. Don't hold your breath on those products.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lastly, investors seem to be catching on, and share price for WATT has dipped and is now around $4.55. Tracking the stock price for the last year, it's not looking good for them. At what point do the institutional investors realize they've been had and bail?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbcUJfc_33eTk3AXkrWSxdmrX3jHCYRjgAva251zozOHf-4npd6S15QQ1v0XxUqDhdifrqq7mksM72S2Ggrc3BkDuTLeIu8Xzq4ftDcm93HbiknK-fecQkwbBdrGEReM8defaucuPSWW4/s1600/wattticker.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="515" data-original-width="608" height="338" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbcUJfc_33eTk3AXkrWSxdmrX3jHCYRjgAva251zozOHf-4npd6S15QQ1v0XxUqDhdifrqq7mksM72S2Ggrc3BkDuTLeIu8Xzq4ftDcm93HbiknK-fecQkwbBdrGEReM8defaucuPSWW4/s400/wattticker.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>uBeam</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Last and definitely least, uBeam. So little going on here compared to the others, Ossia and Spanse at least have technology that can sell even if it's not a wow, and Energous are quite entertaining, but what is happening with my former company? They're continuing to be fairly low profile, as they (presumably) try to package up IP and at least pretend there's a workable product in there somewhere to either licence or sell the company. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=an%2Fubeam%0D%0A&d=PTXT">I took a look to see if there had been any IP filed</a> - generally you see what got filed about 1 year or more ago, and can tell what the company was working on at the time (not 100% certain, sometimes you still patent dead end paths). I was quite surprised by what I found looking at their filings. Now it's often hard to tell what are applications, what are grants, and what are just repeats in the system, but when you see that the most recent patent (10,252,908) was submitted in Feb 2018, that almost all the people listed on it had left the company 1 to 2 years prior to it, and that my name was one it as well, you can tell they're really not producing much new. In fact, going back through them I can see one other that was filed in 2018, and that's also from an employee who left in 2016. Maybe I'm missing a trove of them at the USPTO, but it looks like the bulk of the filings come from people who were there in 2015 and not much beyond. How do you sell a company based on IP when you've not produced new IP in years, the people who did produce that IP have long since left, one of them writes a blog criticizing you, and there's no product?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It seems that uBeam might now hire a third person since their (supposed) $25 million fundraise over 14 months ago. <a href="https://ubeam-inc.workable.com/j/6F65E9E036">This time, it's a Chief Commercial/Revenue Officer</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>uBeam is seeking to hire a Chief Commercial Officer/Chief Revenue Officer. uBeam is the inventor of ultrasonic power-at-a-distance Always-On Wireless EnergyTM, utilizing ultra-safe ultrasonic array technology to deliver reliable, long-range wire-free charging. By developing proprietary transducers, transmitters, receivers, and custom enterprise software, uBeam’s technology delivers usable power to devices ranging from portable electronics, medical, aerospace, automotive, and in particular IoT devices and networks. Significant revenue-generating experience in these fields, coupled with successful B2B licensing experience is essential. Experience in acoustic technology, phased array radar or ultrasound is also highly beneficial.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So "Always-On Wireless Energy" is their new tagline I guess, since it gets a 'TM', although no-one bothered with a superscript. Apparently the technology is not just safe but "ultra-safe" which I'm not sure the definition of but given the emphasis here, they must be feeling a bit of vulnerability on this front. I don't follow why a C-level "revenue" officer needs to have tech experience but bizarrely they want someone with "significant revenue-generating experience in these fields" and I'm not sure who that could be because quite literally no at-distance wireless power company has ever done that - not Energous, not Ossia, perhaps only PowerCast that actually have had a product on sale for a while.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lots of references to dealing with board members in the ad, as well as fundraising. <i>"The CCO/CRO will be required to present to the Board of Directors on a regular basis, and from time to time will be involved in fund-raising activities on behalf of the company."</i>, <i>"Successful experience in fund raising and pitching to investors."</i>, <i>"Have considerable experience presenting at Board of Directors meetings."</i>, and <i>"Ability to efficiently interact with board members."</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's a bit odd to be looking for a C-level hire via regular job board postings, those are mostly done via word of mouth, personal connections, and specialized recruiters. As someone on the EEV Blog pointed out - sounds a lot like the role a CEO should be doing. Is the uBeam CEO looking for a scapegoat already, or is this a replacement?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Phrasing also indicates they're aiming for markets outside the US, which on the one hand you can understand because the professed model needs contract manufacturers which are still heavily in China, but given every other country outside the USA definitively has a 115dB or less ultrasound limit (1000x less power than at the professed 145dB), the product is not viable there unless they ignore the law. <i>"Experience in dealing with issues on an international basis: understanding of the North American and European landscape (knowledge of the Asian market would be a plus)."</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As far as I know, this is a new position, so not from the Perry era and gives a confirmation to the business strategy the company is taking - B2B licensing, with contract manufacturers, and keep it going long enough to bamboozle for another round of investment.<br />
<br />
Oh and apparently <i>"Benefits that are 2nd to none!"</i>. Yeah, I'm going to call bullshit on that. How much PTO? How much in RSUs and bonus? Sabbaticals? Educational supplement? Matching 401k? My recollection (and that of more recent departees) is good benefits for a startup, but can't match that of larger companies.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Last thing for this article - uBeam don't post much on social media like LinkedIn so it was interesting to see them <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6534120247795036160">link to this safety article from the CTO of Wi-Charge (laser based power delivery)</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Forbes just put out a good new article on wireless charging. Wireless Charging can take on many forms, but not all of them are safe and effective. uBeam's ultrasonic wireless power is a differentiated technology that can safely transmit energy over the air across long distances to charge a wide array of electronic devices. </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The premise of the piece was on regulatory and safety aspects of wireless power, yet uBeam used it to claim safety for their own system. Now we don't know what uBeam have (cough), and they do claim "third party testing" has proved it safe, but never released those reports, despite questions on how they can do what they claim at 145 dB when it exceeds sound limits around the world. For those wondering about various limits, <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2019/01/ultrasound-in-air-safety-and-regulations.html">I have a list here</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I have to wonder - do they know and know they are lying, do they deep down suspect and are avoiding checking so they can pretend to themselves they aren't lying, are they just that dumb, or are they true believers? The psychology of this is fascinating, as perhaps each person pretends it's not their responsibility and keeps cashing the paycheque. I really want to find this out someday, sadly I think it's just going to be one of those mysteries.</div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-36966832504519546742019-04-21T23:03:00.000-07:002019-05-26T22:10:07.620-07:00Wireless Charging in 2019<div style="text-align: justify;">
Things aren't looking so good for wireless charging in 2019. There have been a few announcements in the last few weeks that have not been positive for the industry as a whole. Let's start with the big one:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Apple and AirPower</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After over a year of delay since the announcement,<a href="https://techcrunch.com/2019/03/29/apple-cancels-airpower-product-citing-inability-to-meet-its-high-standards-for-hardware/"> Apple finally cancelled AirPower</a>, their multi-device charging pad, based on Qi. This pad was supposed to be able to charge your iPhone, Apple watch, and Airpods all at one time, just dropping them onto the pad. Qi uses inductive charging to transfer power over no more than a few centimeters, though in practice it needs to be in contact.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgH7Yi82yp8sI792aJQ9_pF7tpjEfh1JICIwDskzoTJxInUtvj7FZZ2xd1exRNm9k8XKUUyo4RVXmkVWUboqNbpj6qTUzaX60shXxzXla3BjU8VV4OcnnS1kRrqk4nUFwsOZdxmRPWWhiY/s1600/dims1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="926" data-original-width="1390" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgH7Yi82yp8sI792aJQ9_pF7tpjEfh1JICIwDskzoTJxInUtvj7FZZ2xd1exRNm9k8XKUUyo4RVXmkVWUboqNbpj6qTUzaX60shXxzXla3BjU8VV4OcnnS1kRrqk4nUFwsOZdxmRPWWhiY/s320/dims1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-29/apple-cancels-anticipated-airpower-wireless-charging-accessory?cmpid=BBD033119_TECH&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=190331&utm_campaign=tech">Apple's statement</a> from a Senior VP of Hardware Engineering:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>“After much effort, we’ve concluded AirPower will not achieve our high standards and we have cancelled the project. We apologize to those customers who were looking forward to this launch. We continue to believe that the future is wireless and are committed to push the wireless experience forward,”</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Qi had some limitations - the charged device needed positioned carefully to ensure good charging, was only one device at a time, regularly managed only a couple of Watts charging, and had something of a transmitter/receiver <a href="https://www.digikey.com/en/product-highlight/w/wurth-electronics/wireless-power-solutions">interoperability nightmare</a> - much of the variability happening due to individual device or imperfect positioning. AirPower was supposed to use Apple's technology and market power to overcome all of those and make it simple, easy, effective. While Qi had some limitations from the initial design, it wasn't beyond the realm of possibility that someone with the pockets and infrastructure to force the market in one direction could make it good enough (even if not perfect). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There must have been tremendous pressure within the company to make this work, having made a major public announcement. Apple even spent over <a href="https://www.computerworld.com/article/3234911/apple-just-bought-its-own-wireless-charging-company-heres-why.html">$100 million to buy PowerbyProxi</a>, who had claimed to have solved all these issues. Apparently not, and it would be interesting to see if PbP could actually do what they claimed when bought. It's likely heads will roll over something like this, it's a major screw up and not something to be taken lightly.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Reportedly, the issue was heating - not enough power getting to the devices, for too much heat in the pad. Those inefficiencies come back to bite you, even if you are willing to pay the $ cost of it. What were the likely tradeoffs? Likely adding many small transmit coils to be able to work with any placements of receivers, while determining it's a genuine receiver and not a piece of metal, while limiting crosstalk between coils, without exceeding FCC limits for safety, while making it a simple seamless user experience.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I actually thought Apple would pull it off, after all if anyone is going to it would be them, and other arms of Apple thought so too, with images of AirPower showing up in the documentation for the recently released new AirPods. Perhaps it mostly worked but that's not good enough for Apple, or that there were still some placement issues, or that there was a small chance of something overheating which when you sell 100 million+ a year becomes an inevitability. I was confident enough they'd release it that <a href="https://www.thewirelesssolution.co.uk/blogs/information/paul-reynolds">I even made some statements about it in a recent interview</a>, so of course they then immediately made me look like an idiot. :)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So even with the resources of the largest company in the world, multiple years, working from a known standard, and at zero distance, wireless power beyond the most rudimentary we already have can't currently be made to work satisfactorily for consumers. What does this say about the Energous, Ossia, and uBeam's of the world who want to charge as many devices, at the same charge rate, with new technology at multiple meters? For $100 million, Apple could easily buy one of them to replace AirPower (in face, Energous share price spiked slightly as delusional fanboys claimed this was an opportunity - the same fanboys that likely claimed AirPower had Energous in it when announced...) - yet they don't.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What does this mean for wireless charging moving forward? I'd say don't expect any changes soon, but perhaps Apple have learned enough that a future product will be good enough - but no matter what, nothing will ever be as fast, efficient, safe, and low cost as a wire. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Pi Charging is now Spansive</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/09/wireless-at-distance-charging-may-be.html">About 18 months ago I wrote an article on Pi Charging</a>, which used Qi but tried to 'shape' the fields to extend the charging range into the 10s of centimeters, and would work from a cone shaped object that would sit on a bench or table. It seemed ambitious, but not ridiculously so that it wasn't achievable - range was not excessive, charge rates normal for Qi, so I was fairly optimistic they'd get somewhere with it. <a href="https://www.geek.com/tech/reserve-your-piece-of-pi-the-first-truly-contactless-charger-1747880/">As recently as 6 months ago</a> they were still promoting it, but it seems the company has now undergone some changes<a href="https://blog.usejournal.com/were-now-spansive-e06d4f1c7503"> and has rebranded as "Spansive"</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/04/pi-charging-rebrands-as-spansive-opens-up-to-partners-but-drops-plans-for-its-own-padless-wireless-charger/">According to the CEO</a>, the user testing did found that the cone took up too much desktop space, and that the users did not want a custom case but rather just want to use "brand name cases". Now this seems odd, as in the original article it seemed that they were using the built in Qi capability, and in fact that's one reason I thought it would be a success, as it operated with existing infrastructure. Interestingly, this data says to me that wireless charging is of so little utility to consumers that they won't swap a case or put an Alexa sized hub on their desk. The co-founder then goes on to say:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>“Qi is just not designed, even philosophically if you talk to people at the Qi standard, it’s not focused on one foot, two feet of range.” says MacDonald. “It’s really focused on surfaces and areas rather than volumes.”</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is odd, as it's no surprise what the Qi standard was when the company raised its $14m Series A. Next they say they'll be working with partners to licence its "volumetric" tech in specific products, with the usual "wireless headphones" listed. Mentioning licensing without specifics is usually code for "we've got nothing" so I'm not holding my breath here.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the blog post, the co-founder talks of essentially a flat plate or container where you can place multiple phones and not worry about orientation, and is Qi compatible (despite the noting of its limits). So... AirPower? Constraining their "volumetric" technology to a plane? Who knows, but there was plenty of waffling and marketing speak to get me concerned - when you say "It will ship imminently" without giving a date, it makes me laugh. Let's see what they do in the next few months.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After AirPower, seems I'm now 0 for 2 in predicting wireless charging product launches...</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Next I'll try to write on Energous, they continue their downward share price trajectory, have yet to have a commercial product available, and may have even struggled to complete their share offer which, if true, puts them in a position of running out of money in the next few weeks.</div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-69449366164311558572019-03-06T22:04:00.000-08:002019-05-26T22:10:22.149-07:00Dialog Expect Low Volume Energous Sales in 2019<div style="text-align: justify;">
Earlier today Dialog Semiconductor <a href="https://seekingalpha.com/article/4246818-dialog-semiconductors-dlgnf-ceo-jalal-bagherli-q4-2018-results-earnings-call-transcript">announced on their conference call</a> that they do not expect significant sales for Energous in 2019. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialog_Semiconductor">Dialog is a large semiconductor manufacturer</a> who produce, market, and sell Energous electronics to third parties, and <a href="https://ir.energous.com/press-releases/detail/588/dialog-semiconductor-invests-additional-15-million-in">previously invested up to $25 million</a> in Energous. In the words of Dialog, the relationship is where:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>We provide the product manufacturing and marketing part of that partnership. They do the front-end system design, the technology, the engagement with the customers in terms of getting into new areas</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While Dialog claim to sell the parts, unlike most electronics parts there are no standard data sheets available for the Energous components, and you can't order them from their website, almost as if they don't want anyone to know the actual performance. As Dialog are a publicly traded company, they have earnings calls, and today they were asked how things were going with Energous. The link above has the full transcript, but here's a couple of relevant parts:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>For 2019, it would be some amount of, if you like, low-volume shipment to innovative customers, first-time users, etcetera, who are trying things.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>We don’t expect large volume in 2019. In fact, we have shipped already some units, but we’re talking thousands, they’re not millions. </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is at odds with statement's from Energous' CEO, Steve Rizzone, <a href="https://seekingalpha.com/article/4244744-energous-corporation-watt-ceo-steve-rizzone-q4-2018-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single">from last week's WATT conference call</a>:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>A similar situation befell us with the second top-tier opportunity we were tracking for Q4 revenue. The customer was planning a second quarter product launch, which would have triggered a meaningful order in the fourth quarter of last year to support preproduction and initial mass production manufacturing ramp. ...<b> With these changes, we now anticipate the associated chip order will come and ship in the second quarter of this year.</b></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
as well as:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>We expect to see a number of additional products shipping to the consumer in 2019... A case in point is the fact that we expect to see a number of WattUp-enabled hearing aids from different manufacturers launched to the consumer in 2019.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Hmmm, who to believe?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Dialog announce expected volumes of a few thousand units, at a few dollars each? Given this, it confirms my expectations of no leaps in Energous revenue for the next three quarters.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Another potential issue this raises is that just last week Energous moved forward with a new stock offering, and raised around $23m, which at the current burn rate will barely last for 2 quarters, not enough to get them to 2020 and even a chance of volume sales. Steven Rizzone, CEO, had stated:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>The transaction raised $25 million less expenses, which factoring on our existing cash, forecasted revenues, reduced expense budget for the year, should fund the Company for the foreseeable future. </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let's be generous and say that the 'foreseeable future' is 4 quarters, in which case they need to cut expenses from around $50 million a year to $24 million a year. In the last couple of years expenses have been roughly $30 million in R&D (mostly headcount, currently 71), and around $16 million in stock compensation. So the CEO and pals can keep their stock comp and slash staff by about 50 people, though that won't exactly look like a company with a future. Alternatively, they could give up 100% of their stock compensation, and only have to lose about 15% of the staff (11 or so). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So slash staff, equity comp, or a mystery source of revenue? Hands up everyone who sees this crowd giving up their equity comp, or the magic money fairy dropping a large bag of $ at WATT HQ?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Speaking of stock, it is not having a good time right now. Here is <a href="https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/watt">WATT</a> over the last year - see if you can spot where rumours of Energous being in the Samsung Galaxy S10 started, and when it was announced that it absolutely was not.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGZvM2Xmyr6SWRKJMdZvXfX7Y6LhvrD-l8cDSLEWkkqS60M7i_VK6RivzcOwQmajjSJeNGFTtoky_HjaAFeviXEgyuNqsJsLj1XyxUFSDNEl2DWO_F7xWzUBQHStwqwqMv2CkTqFTxZ4Y/s1600/energousMar16.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="534" data-original-width="630" height="338" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGZvM2Xmyr6SWRKJMdZvXfX7Y6LhvrD-l8cDSLEWkkqS60M7i_VK6RivzcOwQmajjSJeNGFTtoky_HjaAFeviXEgyuNqsJsLj1XyxUFSDNEl2DWO_F7xWzUBQHStwqwqMv2CkTqFTxZ4Y/s400/energousMar16.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Only down 73% since this time last year...</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>(Repeating the seemingly obligatory statement - I have no financial position, short or long, in Energous or any related company. Nor have I ever had any such positions.)</i></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-13049785783515116012019-02-25T23:24:00.001-08:002019-03-06T22:04:19.653-08:00What's Next for Energous?<div style="text-align: justify;">
A summary of what's in this article:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<ul>
<li>Energous are doing their Q4 2018 earnings call from MWC 2 weeks later in February than usual</li>
<li>They are likely to be running out of money by April without a further raise</li>
<li>A $75m raise will not see them to profitability even under the marketing fantasies promoted</li>
<li>Rumours of presence in the Galaxy S10 were false (shock) but boosted the stock price temporarily</li>
<li>Adverts for the Delight PSAP are appearing, labelled 'Hearing Aid', violating FDA rules</li>
<li>Specs indicate 20 to 50mW charging, probably at 2 to 5% efficiency max</li>
<li>The PSAP might work for 10 hours after 4 hours charging, with 6 months of use</li>
<li>Beaten in all specs by rechargeable hearing aids released in 2016</li>
<li>The 20 Watt near field charging announced will IMO never be safe or meet FCC regulations, hence why it's shown in Europe</li>
<li>The collaboration announced with vivo Global is "exploratory" and will IMO never amount to anything</li>
<li>Such exploration with vG either violates the non-competes in the semi-mythical "Tier One" contract, that agreement has expired, or is not with a phone company as Energous often hint</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
My last coverage of Energous was during the Christmas/New Year week when they <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/12/energous-fcc-approval-found-its-renamed.html">announced a "new product" that happened to be a rebadging of a previous release from 8 months prior</a>. Now that aside, the key issue for Energous was that <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/10/energous-earnings-call-q3-2018.html">towards the end of Q3, they had just under $29m in the bank with $12.5m/quarter expenses</a>, meaning they had 7 months operating capital, and that was 5 months ago... So with a capital raise essential, where does the company stand? It's been 5 months since the last quarterly earnings call (no, that doesn't add up) and since then they've done a rather flat CES, and then a mysterious <i>"oh Energous will be in the Samsung S10"</i> which pumped the shareprice a little. If any of you remember the same game with Apple over the last couple of years that never yielded a product, bonus points to you. Today saw a near 10% drop in the stock price as everyone realized they'd been had - again.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So with a desperate need for cash and no sales to speak of, what can Energous do? Cutting expenses will keep it going a little longer, but go too far and no-one believes you have a strong technological future. You have to have products and sales to justify a high share price. Just a reminder of <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/news/edited-transcript-watt-earnings-conference-211125888.html">what they said in the earnings call in February 2018</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div>
<i>We expect the first contact-based transmitters will be in the hands of the consumers in early 2018, followed by the first at-distance transmitters coming in late 2018, culminating in far-field transmitters coming to the market in 2019.</i></div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>We're heads down focused on commercialization, and we believe that the $40 million is sufficient capital to get us to that point (profitability).</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yes, it's clear they were wrong in every single part of what they said there. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The main method that the company can use to raise is to issue more shares in the company (diluting existing shareholders) and sell to the market. The amount of dilution will depend on the raise, and the share price sold at, so it's in the company's interest to pump the stock as much as possible prior to a sale - <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/12/energous-in-2018-sudden-rise-and-long.html">I cover here a few of the tricks they do regarding that</a>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With $50m a year in expenses, <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/08/energous-raising-75-million.html">the $75m sale they registered for last year</a> will, at best, do them 18 months without further revenue - and there's no chance of significant revenue in that time without products. So, they have to give the idea that they will have significant product sales in 2018 and 2019 to support that, given the long-distance wireless charging is at least 18 months out (and IMO will never be released, it's pointless). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>PSAP/Hearing Aids</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Energous need to get products out there to keep the charade going, but also to release products will then allow them into the hands of the public who can actually test them and see how awful they really are. The company either has to admit delay again and risk the share price collapse, or release and definitively prove how little they have. One of the key products they've been hanging their hat on since the middle of last year has been hearing aids (or more precisely a PSAP - Personal Sound Amplification Product - <a href="https://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/ucm373461.htm">since the term 'hearing aid' is controlled by the FDA and they cannot sell claiming it is such without approval</a>). Amazingly, there's now some information on this, <a href="https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/The-World-1st-Wireless-Recharging-Digital_62001416289.html">and there is at least a listing on Alibaba that gives a price of up to $600, a release date of March 2019, and specs</a>:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEize-5-S2rOwCTxRCsMkzuko75dXLrn6kSAxFNwL9-oyAujMa5-7Usq2XXy8J7PzMSeY_nncFYmuYPCeTfwMXmII6U2vSlpjUGYomW65Na3dCXpDEVbDnHUif5iuKFYulh77ZLMV2mkUnM/s1600/delight1.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="503" data-original-width="955" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEize-5-S2rOwCTxRCsMkzuko75dXLrn6kSAxFNwL9-oyAujMa5-7Usq2XXy8J7PzMSeY_nncFYmuYPCeTfwMXmII6U2vSlpjUGYomW65Na3dCXpDEVbDnHUif5iuKFYulh77ZLMV2mkUnM/s400/delight1.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4tNx6BJQNlgwp35oE-BVhBWODqtcbqPxH8J0KZqtirEZiTXxIAupjIw5PEd2tKzMt7VgER5DMPhW7P4QpnDTHk9x5oU78sMPPbhUAfEXuuJLtsAgMHs3eSUes8J-joxGZfB345XhgcYI/s1600/delight2.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="807" data-original-width="768" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4tNx6BJQNlgwp35oE-BVhBWODqtcbqPxH8J0KZqtirEZiTXxIAupjIw5PEd2tKzMt7VgER5DMPhW7P4QpnDTHk9x5oU78sMPPbhUAfEXuuJLtsAgMHs3eSUes8J-joxGZfB345XhgcYI/s400/delight2.PNG" width="380" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdqYZ9_-gYKSSWuAAL7zdm_UTrkoTGYPeCGQCVaQcKm2MhH5LkktR2yrILt4h1xGvhx4baY-_ZUMBzaEbqyEuNtcsxt4XyF5PTT8uXbqwEymb3eeXBeIKg5JrAMO7j81ERtHG0yfrUlYU/s1600/delight4.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="771" data-original-width="682" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdqYZ9_-gYKSSWuAAL7zdm_UTrkoTGYPeCGQCVaQcKm2MhH5LkktR2yrILt4h1xGvhx4baY-_ZUMBzaEbqyEuNtcsxt4XyF5PTT8uXbqwEymb3eeXBeIKg5JrAMO7j81ERtHG0yfrUlYU/s400/delight4.PNG" width="353" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFg9E8ZE4yHN1FE5U43NytfJhNIJMG0ze5JBSo6sV9QW_LQw3LrvSfcIvNtkb_a8gg7XtV2QFDPW7P3114Rz4Ku6wQ6ezk83DLsdMTikfqWc9MjKx0F-oF_NRWaCVxitZ1K71pk9x0CqY/s1600/delight5.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="498" data-original-width="762" height="261" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFg9E8ZE4yHN1FE5U43NytfJhNIJMG0ze5JBSo6sV9QW_LQw3LrvSfcIvNtkb_a8gg7XtV2QFDPW7P3114Rz4Ku6wQ6ezk83DLsdMTikfqWc9MjKx0F-oF_NRWaCVxitZ1K71pk9x0CqY/s400/delight5.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So a few points here - first of which is they are literally labeling it a hearing aid! It's written on the base unit and the specs reference hearing loss, so hardly any way to avoid breaking regulatory limits if it's sold in the US.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Next, we finally have some data on charging - 3 to 4 hours charging for 15 hours of use, using a Li-Ion battery. Great, now Li-Ion batteries are at 3.6 volts (regulated down to the standard 1.4v for your regular zinc-air hearing aid batteries), and they can't yet be made in the small hearing aid packages, so more like a size 13 package. (Hearing aid batteries come in 4 sizes, size 13 is the 3rd largest). Data <a href="https://hearinghealthmatters.org/waynesworld/2017/rechargeable-batteries-hearing-aids/">here</a> indicates that it's around 42 mAh 'effective capacity', compared to around 310 mAh in a standard size 13 battery, barely 15%. Interestingly this site also indicates that there's around a 30% reduction in capacity after 6 months of daily charging. It's going to be annoying charging for 3 to 4 hours for 10 hours of use, and remember because these are Li-Ion they are sealed in the package for safety.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLHp22CSKMY3F_69c752M8_8pvaiNABZ3qn8rIgZWsZtq9iaKorePZB5RVXigDXADhc4rp-JniV0drtbLhpEydPdLGfNrP2NRr1YFqKAyu_PnH_9hqWJWKYXcDZIRgaAzHA6p98OpkXW8/s1600/hab.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="160" data-original-width="381" height="167" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLHp22CSKMY3F_69c752M8_8pvaiNABZ3qn8rIgZWsZtq9iaKorePZB5RVXigDXADhc4rp-JniV0drtbLhpEydPdLGfNrP2NRr1YFqKAyu_PnH_9hqWJWKYXcDZIRgaAzHA6p98OpkXW8/s400/hab.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Most hearing aids draw around 2mA, so at about 70% efficiency that gives around 15 hours of use, matching the numbers above. Now convert that to Watts, and 1.4 volts and 42 mAh means around 60mWh, and at 3 hours to charge, that's about 20 mW charging. Ouch - even if I were generous and said 3.6 volts that's 150 mWh so 50 mW charging. If that's the standard charger that emits 1 Watt, it's around 2 to 5% efficiency. If that's the best Energous can do with their receiver chips, it's somewhat embarrassing even for them. Sad for a company that only a few years ago claimed it could send power to phones at over 12 feet and up to 4 Watts.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
I'm also not sure how this product can be sold, in the US at least. Where's the FCC ID for the transmitter and receiver? <a href="https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm">A search of the FCC system</a> shows no new IDs for those companies. Any regulatory approval for other countries?<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Of course, they may be timing the 'release' of this product until after a share sale, and that miraculously it never makes it to market...<br />
<br />
Now is this a revolutionary product that will delight users? Nope. <a href="https://www.signiausa.com/signia-hearing-aids/cellion-primax-hearing-aids/">Here's Signia's Cellion</a>, <a href="https://www.signia-library.com/scientific_marketing/cellion-primax-the-new-benchmark-in-rechargeable-hearing-aid-technology/">with rechargable batteries</a>, a docking station with inductive charging, and claims 50 mAh, 1500+ recharges, 7 hours of use on a 30 minute charge, 24+ hours of use on a full charge, and announced in 2016. (And, unlike PSAPS, these are hearing aids). So well done Energous, you fail to match every specification on a near 3 year old product. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>20 Watt Near Field Charging</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Energous are at the Mobile World Congress and today <a href="https://ir.energous.com/press-releases/detail/629/mobile-world-congress-2019-energous-demonstrates-wattup">apparently demonstrated their 20 Watt Near Field charging</a>. Now I about fell off my chair when I read that - <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2018/04/energous-fcc-approval-shows-weakness-of.html">if you look at their 2018 near field approval</a>, it shows 1 Watt transmitted and sitting at the SAR safety limit, while recommending no-one remain within 10 centimeters of the product in operation. And they go to 20 Watts? There's a reason they are showing in Europe, and it's because the FCC would have a fit it they did that. I'm surprised the European regulators aren't all over that (if anyone knows EU regulations on the ~900 MHz band, please contribute). The only way I could see this being safe is if they put it in a metal box and it only worked with the lid closed. <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2014/09/24/fake-microwave-charging-ad-enrages-apple-ios8-users.html">The old joke about putting your iPhone in the microwave to charge it is one step closer to reality...</a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Think these guys aren't averse to putting an unshielded microwave out there? <a href="https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2018/09/wireless-charging-standards-still-struggling-to-power-up/">Here's Mark Hopgood, senior director of strategic marketing for power-chip manufacturer Dialog Semiconductor</a>, who invested in and make the chips for Energous:<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>“We have some customers doing this. If you have proof there is nothing between the charger and the receiver, you can turn it up to something more like microwave oven levels.”</i><br />
<br />
I need to go look up OSHA rules on RF exposure now.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Regardless, IMO this will never come to fruition as a product for consumers. It's not safe, and will never meet regulatory compliance. It's just another way to fool people without any in-depth understanding of the technology. Is this why they delayed the earnings call, so they could show off something that will never meet FCC compliance in another country? Anything to push that stock price up.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>A Phone Company!</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Finally, Energous announce they'll be in a phone. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div>
<i>Energous Corporation the developer of WattUp, a revolutionary wireless charging 2.0 technology, today announced a <b>collaboration</b> with vivo Global, a leading Chinese technology company, to <b>explore </b>integrating WattUp into smartphone designs that charge wirelessly over-the-air.</i></div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>
<div>
<i>“We are excited to announce a collaboration with vivo, a top 6 global smartphone manufacturer, to explore the use of our WattUp wireless charging 2.0 technology,” said Stephen R. Rizzone</i></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Well, no. They announce a "collaboration" with vivo Global, to "explore the use of WattUp", so basically nothing. <a href="https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2016/04/do-we-have-deal.html">One of my earliest articles on Energous was how they use carefully worded announcements to let the reader make inferences that aren't in fact there</a>. Like everything Energous, it will utterly fail to meet the expectations set, other than to boost the stock price temporarily.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Further, don't Energous often make reference to a "Tier One" vendor contract (often intimating that it's Apple) that have restrictions on who they can work with? If so, then the Tier One agreement is no longer in place, or the Tier One isn't a phone company. Either way, not good for Energous!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Earnings Call</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://ir.energous.com/press-releases/detail/628/energous-corporation-announces-conference-call-for-fourth">The Q4 2018 earnings call will be this Wednesday 27th</a>, in the morning US time (5.30am Pacific) as the executive team is at MWC. I'm looking forward to how they spin all this, I'm always amazed by the true genius (and shamelessness) of Energous in how they keep this thing going. It has to end one day, but they seem to be able to get blood out of a stone better than anyone.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>(Repeating the seemingly obligatory statement - I have no financial position, short or long, in Energous or any related company. Nor have I ever had any such positions.)</i></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057869926275243678.post-69702866661670133502019-02-18T21:36:00.004-08:002019-02-25T23:53:33.287-08:00Every TED Talk Ever<div style="text-align: justify;">
The amazing story of a founder who with no experience but grit, determination, financial security, and a healthy sense of hustle, raised $60 million to solve the biggest problem she could find.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/X9advgMBbdo" width="560"></iframe></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<span style="text-align: justify;">Once you've watched it, <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/i-gave-fake-tedx-talk-everybody-thought-real-lindsey-quinn/">read the reaction the author got to the performance in this LinkedIn post.</a></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Exactly 7 days before the October TEDx event in Oakland, the event organizer put out a call to Bay Area comedians to perform a 7-minute set at TEDx that weekend.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Instead, I pitched him a character I’d been working on: a Frankenperson cobbled together from the stories of every out-of-touch startup founder and thought leader cliche I’d seen during my time in the tech industry -- complete with brightly-colored blazer.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>He agreed. Though, in hindsight, I don’t think he knew what he was signing on for.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Big round of applause for Lindsey Quinn here. For more parodies of TED talks watch this:<br />
<br /></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0Rnq1NpHdmw?start=949" width="560"></iframe>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Or the most ridiculous parody of them all:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ukgnU2aXM2c" width="560"></iframe>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
StartupPRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10863632782404121915noreply@blogger.com5