Connect with us


Sinch acquires Inteliquent for $1.14B to take on Twilio in the US



After raising $690 million from SoftBank in December to make acquisitions, the Sweden-based cloud communications company Sinch has followed through on its strategy in that department. Today the company announced that it is acquiring Inteliquent, an interconnection provider for voice communications in the U.S. currently owned by private equity firm GTCR, for $1.14 billion in cash.

And to finance the deal, Sinch said it has raised financing totaling SEK8.2 billion — $986 million — from Handelsbanken and Danske Bank, along with other facilities it had in place.

The deal will give Sinch — a competitor to Twilio with a range of messaging, calling and marketing (engagement) APIs for those building communications into their services in mobile apps and other services — a significant foothold in the U.S. market.

Inteliquent — a profitable company with 500 employees and revenues of $533 million, gross profit of $256 million, and Ebitda of $135 million in 2020 — claims to be one of the biggest voice carriers North America, serving both other service providers and enterprises. Its network connects to all the major telcos, covering 94% of the U.S. population, with more than 300 billion minutes of voice calls and 100 million phone numbers handled annually for customers.

Sinch is publicly traded in Sweden — where its market cap is current at $13 billion (just over 108 billion Swedish krona) — and the acquisition begs the question of whether the company plans to establish more of a financial presence in the U.S., for example with a listing there. We have asked the company what its next steps might be and will update this post as and when we learn more.

“Becoming a leader in the U.S. voice market is key to establish Sinch as the leading global cloud communications platform,” said Oscar Werner, Sinch CEO, in a statement. “Inteliquent serves the largest and most demanding voice customers in America with superior quality backed by a fully-owned network across the entire U.S.. Our joint strengths in voice and messaging provide a unique position to grow our business and power a superior customer experience for our customers.”

Inteliquen provides two main areas of service, Communications-Platform-as-Service (CPaaS) for API-based services to provide voice calling and phone numbers; and more legacy Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) products for telcos such as off-net call termination (when a call is handed off from one carrier to another) and toll-free numbers. These each account for roughly half of the total business although — unsurprisingly — the CPaaS business is growing at twice the rate of IaaS.

Its business, like many others focusing on services for people who are relying more on communications services as they are seeing each other in person less — saw a surge of use this past year, it said. (Revenues adjusted without Covid lift, it noted, would have been $499 million, so still healthy.)

As for Sinch, since spinning out from Rebtel in 2014 to take on the business of providing comunications tools to developers, it has been on an acquisition roll to bulk up its geographical reach and the services that it provides to those customers.

Deals have included, most recently, buying ACL in India for $70 million and SAP’s digital interconnect business for $250 million. The deals — combined with Twilio’s own acquisitions of companies like Sendgrid for $2 billion and last year’s Segment for $3.2 billon, speak both to the bigger trend of consolidation in the digital (API-based) communications space, as well as the huge value that is contained within it.

Inteliquent itself had been in private equity hands before this, controlled by GTCR based in Chicago, like Inteliquent itself. According to PitchBook, its most recent financing was a mezzanine loan from Oaktree Capital in 2018 for just under $19 million.

Interestingly, Inteliquent itself has been an investor in innovative communications startups, participating in a Series B for Zipwhip, a startup that is building better ways to integrate mobile messaging tools into landline services.

“We’re excited about the tremendous opportunities this combination unlocks, expanding the services we can provide to our customers. Combining our leading voice offering with Sinch’s global messaging capabilities truly positions us for leadership in the rapidly developing market for cloud communications“, comments Ed O’Hara, Inteliquent CEO, in a statement.

Lyron Foster is a Hawaii based African American Musician, Author, Actor, Blogger, Filmmaker, Philanthropist and Multinational Serial Tech Entrepreneur.

Continue Reading


Nigerian founders-turn-investors are now running syndicate funds



The Future Africa Fund kicked off in 2015 when Iyinoluwa Aboyeji and Nadayar Enegesi, co-founders of US-based and African-focused talent company Andela, wrote checks to African startups as angel investors. This continued even as Aboyeji joined and left Flutterwave, the fintech company he co-founded.

In January 2020, the pair made the fund official, with Aboyeji as general partner and Enegesi as limited partner. Simultaneously, they announced that the fund had invested $1.5 million across 19 African companies.

The idea for a syndicate fund would come in the following months as the pandemic disrupted investment activities worldwide.

In the past year, syndicates have been emerging as a key force for investing — and for startups seeking capital to get going — on the continent. This is because most of the capital in Africa for promising startups is typically distributed among many investors. Syndicates are now emerging as one way of bringing the long tail together for more equity firepower.

During the onset of the pandemic, Aboyeji, via his blog post, said Future Africa Fund was looking to raise institutional investment. However, the whole process proved difficult and the fund wasn’t able to because he was stuck in Nigeria and could not visit London, New York and Washington DC, “where institutional and development finance capital sits.”

But in April, the fund decided to improvise by launching a syndicate arm called the Future Africa Collective.

“There’s a massive early-stage funding gap for African startups. All the data we were looking at pointed to the fact that work needed to be done to bridge that gap,” Aboyeji told TechCrunch. “We simply couldn’t go on the journey alone to fix the gap and decided to build Future Africa Collective to democratize access to African startups. We think of ourselves as pioneers in this field.”

Here, Future Africa acts as the syndicate lead sourcing investments, conducting due diligence, and securing allocations for investors called backers.

It’s a similar model employed by AngelList, the company founded by Indian-American entrepreneur Naval Ravikant and Babak Nivi as a fundraising platform for startups to raise money from angel investors. Over the years, the angel network has based its infrastructure on syndicates — investment vehicles that allow investors, referred to as backers, to co-invest with prominent investors — known as leaders.

Syndicate leads are often experienced angel investors or successful startup founders. They have a wealth of knowledge from playing different roles in the building of a startup ecosystem. On the other hand, backers don’t have much experience investing in startups most times, and for some that do, they will rather allow syndicate leads choose startups to invest in and manage their investments.

On AngelList, there are over 200 active syndicate leads listed with a typical check size ranging from $200,000 to $350,000. Collectively, they have invested more than $2 billion in startups globally.

Adopting syndicate funds for African startups

Like Aboyeji, two other Nigerian tech entrepreneurs — Bosun Tijani and Jason Njoku — have also launched syndicate funds within the past year.

Tijani is the co-founder and CEO of Co-Creation Hub (CcHub), a pan-African innovation hub with offices in Lagos and Nairobi. He is also an angel investor, and via CcHub’s accelerator programme and a partner fund called Growth Capital Fund, Tijani has invested in more than 40 startups.

So why launch a syndicate given the success of the other funds? According to Tijani, the syndicate hopes to solve the challenges that exist with traditionally structured investment vehicles. Here’s what he means.

In 2019, Nigeria accounted for more than 53% of the diaspora remittances to the African continent. Primarily, these remittances are channelled for domestic consumption. Tijani wants the CcHub Syndicate to be an avenue where a percentage of these remittances can come in to deepen the quality of capital available to local entrepreneurs. He believes the syndicate will help Africans in the diaspora who are passionate about nation-building but do not have the capacity to be limited partners in a typical fund structure, to co-invest alongside CcHUB in high growth tech companies across Africa.

“We see the syndicate as a complementary vehicle to our VC fund as it deploys bridge financing to companies with proven traction seeking to raise funds to meet critical milestones ahead of their next funding cycles,” he said.

But before CcHub launched its $500,000 accelerator programme and Aboyeji founded Andela in 2014, Jason Njoku of iROKO had already begun to invest in startups.

Two years after launching the African entertainment company in 2011, Njoku and his co-founder Bastian Gotter launched Spark, a self-described company builder and a $2 million fund. The fund whose LPs were HNIs investing between $100,000 to $500,000 has gone through several iterations to stay alive.

The fund is currently in harvest mode but that hasn’t stopped Njoku from investing personally. His personal portfolio and Spark’s successful exit in Paystack has earned him a reputation that allows him to run some online communities where he charges people for his insights as an angel investor. 

He tells me that Investzilla came into play when a couple of investors wanted to access his deal flow after Paystack’s acquisition.

“I have been advising and referring investors into companies informally for the last few years, so this just formalizes it,” he said. “Investzilla investors wouldn’t consider themselves HNIs but have the ambition to invest $3-10k in several early-stage companies annually. Investzilla is focused on unlocking that opportunity for them.”

In a nutshell, the Future Africa Collective, CcHub Syndicate, and Investzilla want to improve access to financing for African founders. The plan is to reduce venture flight which has become prevalent in the ecosystem in recent times. But how do they work, and what progress have they made so far?

The nitty-gritty details

Typically, leads allow backers to join the syndicate via an application. After vetting and then approving these backers, they gain access to the syndicate’s deal flow and can pick investments on a deal-by-deal basis. Also, they are mandated to pay a one-time fee to join.

For Investzilla, backers pay a membership fee of $500. Thereafter, investors can put between $5,000 to $15,000 checks in more than 10 early-stage companies annually. While there has been no public announcement yet on its launch, Njoku says the syndicate soft-launched with 20 investors in January, and deals are waiting to be completed in the pipeline.

CcHub Syndicate, on the other hand, launched in December 2020. Tijani doesn’t state how much the syndicate’s administration fee costs but says the minimum backers can invest is $5,000.

So far, the syndicate has signed up more than 400 individuals, investing groups and institutional investors. Out of that number, a little above 30 investors have undertaken the syndicate’s KYC (Know Your Customer) process. Last month, it announced that a total of $267,500 had been raised to support three Nigerian startups’ bridge financing rounds.

Meanwhile, the Future Africa Collective charges a membership due of $1000 a year and four times a year; it selects some backers to the syndicate. Each quarter, backers are presented with five startups they can invest in with a minimum of $5,000. In less than a year, Future Africa Collective has grown to over 160 members. Collectively, they have invested over $1 million in 14 startups across Africa.

L-R: Jason Njoku (Investzilla), Iyinoluwa Aboyeji (Future Africa Collective), and Bosun Tijani (CcHub Syndicate)

One important thing to note is that a transaction fee prorated by their check size is charged for every deal a backer makes across all three syndicates.

The three syndicates also charge carry, which is a cut of positive returns generated by the investment. For instance, Future Africa has a 20% carry. If a backer invests $5,000 in the syndicate and the investment returns $20,000, the syndicate would earn $3,000 in carry, leaving the backer with $12,000 profit. Like Future Africa, Investzilla charges a 20% carry, but CcHub Syndicate does 15%.

As to when the return on investments is scheduled to be made, Aboyeji says the Future Africa Collective is designed to return upon secondaries.

“We hold the right to decide when to exit, but if there are any opportunities, we discuss them with the syndicate. Returns are disbursed to the syndicate members who invested in specific startups should there be an exit,” he said.

And the timeline for this across the syndicates is designated around 5 to 10 years.

That said, with Africa’s seed-stage funding gap not closed enough yet, the founders believe that there will be increased participation from more players with varied syndication models

Njoku, who is enthused about more capital being pumped into Africa’s tech ecosystem, says if these syndicates can get more than 200 angels to commit between $3,000 to $10,000 in at least five startups in a year, the continent might start to see more high net worth individuals participate in tech investments

“If we can unlock that, then it would be $2 million to $10 million in early-stage funding annually, which may or may have been attracted in the first place. Like Iyin and Bosun, founders who have created a lot of wealth with African tech feel comfortable and breed confidence. That’s an attractive asset class for executives or HNIs.”

Continue Reading


Recovering from the SolarWinds hack could take 18 months



Fully recovering from the SolarWinds hack will take the US government from a year to as long as 18 months, according to the head of the agency that is leading Washington’s recovery.

Brandon Wales, the acting director of CISA, the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, says that it will be well into 2022 before officials have fully secured the government networks compromised by Russian hackers. The list includes at least nine federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department. Even fully understanding the extent of the damage will take months.

“I wouldn’t call this simple,” Wales says. “There are two phases for response to this incident. There is the short-term remediation effort, where we look to remove the adversary from the network, shutting down accounts they control, and shutting down entry points the adversary used to access networks. But given the amount of time they were inside these networks—months—strategic recovery will take time.”

“Given the amount of time they were inside these networks… strategic recovery will take time.”

Brandon Wales, CISA

When the hackers have succeeded so thoroughly and for so long, the answer sometimes can be a complete rebuild from scratch. The hackers made a point of undermining trust in targeted networks, stealing identities, and gaining the ability to impersonate or create seemingly legitimate users in order to freely access victims’ Microsoft 365 and Azure accounts. By taking control of trust and identity, the hackers become that much harder to track.

“Most of the agencies going through that level of rebuilding will take in the neighborhood of 12 to 18 months to make sure they’re putting in the appropriate protections,” Wales says. 

The hack on SolarWinds, a US software firm with customers around the world, was first discovered in November 2020. But American intelligence agencies say Russian hackers first infiltrated in 2019. Subsequent investigation has shown that the hackers started using the company’s products to distribute malware by March 2020, and their first successful breach of the US federal government came early in the summer. That’s a long time to go unnoticed—longer than many organizations keep the kind of expensive forensic logs you need to do the level of investigation required to sniff the hackers out.

SolarWinds Orion, the network management product that was targeted, is used in tens of thousands of corporations and government agencies. Over 17,000 organizations downloaded the infected back door. The hackers were extraordinarily stealthy and specific in targeting, which is why it took so long to catch them—and why it’s taking so long to understand their full impact.

The difficulty of uncovering the extent of the damage was summarized by Brad Smith, the president of Microsoft, in a congressional hearing last week. 

“Who knows the entirety of what happened here?” he said. “Right now, the attacker is the only one who knows the entirety of what they did.”

Kevin Mandia, CEO of the security company FireEye, which raised the first alerts about the attack, told Congress that the hackers prioritized stealth above all else.

“Disruption would have been easier than what they did,” he said. “They had focused, disciplined data theft. It’s easier to just delete everything in blunt-force trauma and see what happens. They actually did more work than what it would have taken to go destructive.”

“This has a silver lining”

CISA first heard about a problem when FireEye discovered that it had been hacked and notified the agency. The company regularly works closely with the US government, and although it wasn’t legally obligated to tell anyone about the hack, it quickly shared news of the compromise with sensitive corporate networks.

It was Microsoft that told the US government federal networks had been compromised. The company shared that information with Wales on December 11, he said in an interview. Microsoft observed the hackers breaking into the Microsoft 365 cloud that is used by many government agencies. A day later, FireEye informed CISA of the back door in SolarWinds, a little-known but extremely widespread and powerful tool. 

This signaled that the scale of the hack could be enormous. CISA’s investigators ended up working straight through the holidays to help agencies hunt for the hackers in their networks.

These efforts were made even more complicated because Wales had only just taken over at the agency: days earlier, former director Chris Krebs had been fired by Donald Trump for repeatedly debunking White House disinformation about a stolen election. 

While headlines about the firing of Krebs focused on the immediate impact on election security, Wales had a lot more on his hands. 

The new man in charge at CISA is now faced with what he describes as “the most complex and challenging” hacking incident the agency has come up against.

The hack will almost certainly accelerate the already apparent rise of CISA by increasing its funding, authority, and support. 

CISA was recently given the legal authority to persistently hunt for cyber threats across the federal government, but Wales says the agency lacks the resources and personnel to carry out that mission. He argues that CISA also needs to be able to deploy and manage endpoint detection systems on computers throughout the federal government in order to detect malicious behavior. Finally, pointing to the fact that the hackers moved freely throughout the Microsoft 365 cloud, Wales says CISA needs to push for more visibility into the cloud environment in order to detect cyber espionage in the future.

In the last year, supporters of CISA have been pushing for it to become the nation’s lead cybersecurity agency. An unprecedented cybersecurity disaster could prove to be the catalyst it needs.

“This has a silver lining,” said Mark Montgomery, who served as executive director of the Cyberspace Solarium Commission, in a phone call. “This is among the most significant malicious cyber acts ever conducted against the US government. The story will continue to get worse for several months as more understanding of what happened is revealed. That will help focus the incoming administration on this issue. They have a lot of priorities, so it would be easy for cyber to get lost in the clutter. That’s not going to happen now.”

Continue Reading


TikTok calls in outside help with content moderation in Europe



TikTok is bringing in external experts in Europe in fields such as child safety, young people’s mental health and extremism to form a Safety Advisory Council to help it with content moderation in the region.

The move, announced today, follows an emergency intervention by Italy’s data protection authority in January — which ordered TikTok to block users it cannot age verify after the death of a girl who was reported by local media to have died of asphyxiation as a result of participating in a black out challenge on the video sharing platform.

The social media platform has also been targeted by a series of coordinated complaints by EU consumer protection agencies, which put out two reports last month detailing a number of alleged breaches of the bloc’s consumer protection and privacy rules — including child safety-specific concerns.

“We are always reviewing our existing features and policies, and innovating to take bold new measures to prioritise safety,” TikTok writes today, putting a positive spin on needing to improve safety on its platform in the region.

“The Council will bring together leaders from academia and civil society from all around Europe. Each member brings a different, fresh perspective on the challenges we face and members will provide subject matter expertise as they advise on our content moderation policies and practices. Not only will they support us in developing forward-looking policies that address the challenges we face today, they will also help us to identify emerging issues that affect TikTok and our community in the future.”

It’s not the first such advisory body TikTok has launched. A year ago it announced a US Safety Advisory Council, after coming under scrutiny from US lawmakers concerned about the spread of election disinformation and wider data security issues, including accusations the Chinese-owned app was engaging in censorship at the behest of the Chinese government.

But the initial appointees to TikTok’s European content moderation advisory body suggest its regional focus is more firmly on child safety/young people’s mental health and extremism and hate speech, reflecting some of the main areas where it’s come under the most scrutiny from European lawmakers, regulators and civil society so far.

TikTok has appointed nine individuals to its European Council (listed here) — initially bringing in external expertise in anti-bullying, youth mental health and digital parenting; online child sexual exploitation/abuse; extremism and deradicalization; anti-bias/discrimination and hate crimes — a cohort it says it will expand as it adds more members to the body (“from more countries and different areas of expertise to support us in the future”).

TikTok is also likely to have an eye on new pan-EU regulation that’s coming down the pipe for platforms operating in the region.

EU lawmakers recently put forward a legislative proposal that aims to dial up accountability for digital service providers over the content they push and monetize. The Digital Services Act, which is currently in draft, going through the bloc’s co-legislative process, will regulate how a wide range of platforms must act to remove explicitly illegal content (such as hate speech and child sexual exploitation).

The Commission’s DSA proposal avoided setting specific rules for platforms to tackle a broader array of harms — such as issues like youth mental health — which, by contrast, the UK is proposing to address in its plan to regulate social media (aka the Online Safety bill). However the planned legislation is intended to drive accountability around digital services in a variety of ways.

For example, it contains provisions that would require larger platforms — a category TikTok would most likely fall into — to provide data to external researchers so they can study the societal impacts of services. It’s not hard to imagine that provision leading to some head-turning (independent) research into the mental health impacts of attention-grabbing services. So the prospect is platforms’ own data could end up translating into negative PR for their services — i.e. if they’re shown to be failing to create a safe environment for users.

Ahead of that oversight regime coming in, platforms have increased incentive to up their outreach to civil society in Europe so they’re in a better position to skate to where the puck is headed.


Continue Reading