

Get in the KNOW
on LA Startups & Tech
X
Courtesy of Xos and Rivian
EV Startups Rivian and Xos Highlight Uncertainty in a Volatile World
David Shultz
David Shultz reports on clean technology and electric vehicles, among other industries, for dot.LA. His writing has appeared in The Atlantic, Outside, Nautilus and many other publications.
The world of electric vehicle startups remains a rollercoaster of uncertainty. This week, we saw news from two of Southern California’s biggest names in the space with radically different announcements.
Let's start with the good: At Rivian, a tweet from CEO RJ Scaringe suggested that the company was back on pace to hit its production targets of 25,000 vehicles this year.
\u201cSupply chain and production are ramping! We just announced production of 4,401 vehicles for Q2 bringing our cumulative total since start of production to 7,969 \u2014 keeping us on track to reach our year-end goals. Thank you to our team & suppliers.\u201d— RJ Scaringe (@RJ Scaringe) 1657112781
So what do I feel when I see a tweet like this?
A cautious optimism? Yes, but wrapped in a skepticism that the company has been wrong so many times before. This is a company that has historically failed to hit targets. Earlier this year supply chain and inflationary woes forced the company to raise prices on several of its vehicles earlier this year, which led to a shareholder lawsuit, some eventual backtracking, an apology, a stock slide, etc. They very well may turn the corner, and this news (among other things) is encouraging, but call me when that 25,000th car rolls off the line.
On the other side of town, electric trucking company, Xos, announced that it would lay off 8% of its staff according to reporting from Business Insider. This is a company that went public via SPAC merger on August 20, 2021 in a deal valued at $2 billion and has subsequently seen its stock lose nearly 80% of its value. According to the report, yesterday’s bad news is attributable to a cash shortage and “slowing macroeconomic growth.” It’s a common refrain for many startups across the nation: Inflation prompts the Fed to raise interest rates; investors get skittish; suddenly VC cash is hard to come by and profitability becomes more attractive than growth at all costs.
The whole EV space is an absolute rollercoaster, but it’s a roller coaster where you’re blindfolded and half the track may or may not exist in front of you. One minute you’re building momentum and the next minute your supply of door handle computer chips that you’re importing from Taiwan dries up without warning. Why car doors need computer chips is a great question, but we’ll leave that discussion for another time.
Why we need EVs, generally, is a much easier question, and its answer also partially explains why the sector (and the world) is so rife with uncertainty. Climate change is one of those rare problems that undermines its own solution: We need new technology to solve climate change, but climate change is stymying our ability to create that technology. Not every flood, heatwave, disease, or humanitarian crisis is directly attributable to climate change (you’d have a tough time convincing me that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is, at its core, a climate issue) but climate change makes flooding, heatwaves, zoonosis and civil strife more likely. And, as a result, at a time where societal cohesion is more critical than ever, it seems like the amplitude of uncertainty in business has never been higher.
Because we waited until the eleventh hour to start addressing it, climate change has become a pressure cooker on business. Mitigating its impacts requires that many things all happen simultaneously. It’s not enough to decarbonize the grid and convert cars to electric. We also need carbon capture, sustainable aviation fuels, a new way to make cement and a battery technology revolution. All at the same time. And any hiccup or setback means that the uncertainty we’re fighting to protect against grows.
And because the threats are so existential and multivariate it’s hard to imagine any CEO being able to anticipate them. Nobody saw COVID coming, not really. Not with the temporal acuity to steer a startup around the pothole. The other day my friend bought a bunch of Rivian stock. When I asked him why, he told me that he likes that they actually have cars on the road. Now, my friend is an idiot for a variety of reasons, but when it comes to betting on EV startups, actually delivering cars to consumers may be as good a tea leaf as any.
From Your Site Articles
- Rivian, Fisker Get Pummeled Amid Stock Market Selloff - dot.LA ›
- Xos Trucks Unveils New Electric Semi and Delivery Trucks - dot.LA ›
- Could Rivian Layoffs Actually Signal Progress? - dot.LA ›
- SoCal’s EV Industry Heads Into Strange Times - dot.LA ›
- The Barriers to EV Adoption That Actually Matter - dot.LA ›
- The Barriers to EV Adoption That Actually Matter - dot.LA ›
- Xos Secures Multi-Million Dollar Armored EV Deal - dot.LA ›
Related Articles Around the Web
David Shultz
David Shultz reports on clean technology and electric vehicles, among other industries, for dot.LA. His writing has appeared in The Atlantic, Outside, Nautilus and many other publications.
ABCmouse Is Teaching Kids and Upending Classrooms. Can Education Research Keep Up?
07:03 AM | August 25, 2021
The pandemic has prompted the adoption of educational technology, contributing to a red-hot edtech market and reshaping how children are learning.
Last year alone, investors sunk $2.2 billion into edtech companies, according to EdSurge. And data from PitchBook show the first half of this year has already surpassed that, reaching $3.6 billion
ABCmouse, one of the most popular children's learning apps, watched in June as its Glendale-based parent company pulled off the largest financing round ever for an edtech company: $300 million.
Alongside it, a raft of children's educational apps — from Khan Academy Kids to Newsela — promise to improve children's academic skills. Duolingo, a popular language learning app, went public in July. On its first day of trading, shares closed up 36%, valuing the company at nearly $5 billion. But there remain questions about whether all the screen time is effective and educational.
Tony Wan, head of investor content at San Francisco-based venture capital firm Reach Capital, said many investors who have been trepidatious of investments in edtech in the past have witnessed the explosion in the adoption of edtech tools at home and in classrooms, attracting larger private equity firms and more prominent venture capitalists.
"I think the experience [during the pandemic] has really opened up their eyes, followed by their wallets, in terms of the potential that education technology has and how broadly some of these services span across geographies and across age ranges," Wan said.
Educational Experience or Sanctioned Screen Time?
Age of Learning, the 14-year-old company represented by an iconic little grey mouse, was valued at $3 billion after it clinched a financing round backed by TPG, along with Qatar Investment Authority and Madrone Capital Partners. It's one of the largest U.S. edtech companies of its kind.
The company was founded in 2007 by Doug Dohring, who created and sold NeoPets in 2005, a company that allowed users to own virtual pets and buy virtual items for them using virtual money.
Dohring, who declined to talk, has said he wanted to create educational software to address the millions of students who are below grade level standards in reading and math, not one trying to sell products to kids. (NeoPets was criticized for the prevalence of ads on its website).
ABCmouse promises to get anxious parents' kindergarteners reading and their older children up to speed just by "playing" educational games.
And while Age of Learning has funded several studies to evaluate whether their products work, many academics say third-party research is needed to determine the effectiveness of such edtech apps, although effectiveness is difficult to measure.
"It's hard to say if it's truly, truly helping improve student learning, but I do think if it's helping students engage and practice skills and getting them excited to want to learn, then to me, that's successful," said Tim Green, a professor of educational technology at California State University Fullerton.
But there is not a great amount of specific research on these tools, especially studies that have been replicated, Green said. One classroom with a specific teacher and a specific group of kids does not represent all classrooms.
"If I'm having students spend an hour to two hours using ABCmouse, I want to be able to see some gains specifically," Green said. "I think it's difficult to do with a lot of software because those kinds of studies are not the easiest to set up, so I'm not sure that's always possible."
In the absence of research, educators must evaluate whether children are actively engaged in the content or view it as just a game.
"We have to look at what are they doing on the device," said Sophia Mendoza, director of the L.A. Unified School District's Instructional Technology Initiative. She added that the implementation of these programs in classrooms must be "strategic and purposeful."
Teachers who leaned on technology during the pandemic have grown accustomed to it. And with the edtech market continuing to boom, academics said it's also important for investors to be concerned about whether the companies they back are educational.
"If you're saying you're going to improve a students' ability to do math skills. It is important to see that there's some evidence with that — and that can be difficult to measure," Green said. "Should investors be concerned about that? Of course."
But Doug Lynch, a faculty member at USC's Rossier School of Education, isn't convinced it's possible for investors to do true due diligence when it comes to edtech.
"Now everybody is, for better or worse, interested in edtech, so there's a lot of money coming in," he said. "They're very smart investors, but they don't know a lot about the market and what the science tells us about learning."
Compounding the problem is the lack of a regulatory body overseeing edtech, giving it less scrutiny than other industries.
"We don't follow the same rigor that we do in education the way we do in healthcare, for example," he said.
A good gauge could be whether school districts purchase the software, but some startup companies do not make it, Lynch said.
COVID Was the Catalyst
Age of Learning has "made it" by many measures.
Its programs have been accessed by 50 million children globally and have been used in hundreds of thousands of classrooms, according to the company.
"It never loses track of your child's progress. All you have to do is play," the company says in a promotional video touting the $12.99 monthly subscription service.
Children can navigate through the app's yellow classroom into more than 850 lessons that can take the shape of a zoo or a farm and include 10,000 activities that range from reading and math to puzzles, games and painting.
The digital lessons seem like a total win for overextended parents, many who struggle to steer their child away from idle screen time in a world where everything is done online.
"Our work is to build quality, engaging, effective digital learning programs that help kids develop a love of learning and in doing so, build core skills that help them in school and beyond," said Zachary Katz, an executive at the Age of Learning who leads legal, corporate and business affairs.
With products aimed at kids 2 to 8 years old, Katz said kids typically spend 45 minutes on the app per week.
"You're not talking about a very heavy load of screen time," he said.
The company's latest infusion of capital will help it expand internationally and invest in a patented system to determine a child's skill level.
It comes as the company must also repay customers $10 million over illegal marketing and billing practices, after regulators found last year the Age of Learning automatically renewed tens of thousands of customer subscriptions, charging them without their consent. The Federal Trade Commission also found the edtech company made it difficult for customers to cancel memberships, earning the company even more fines.
Even as children are returning to classrooms, Katz said Age of Learning expects to keep growing. It's subscriber base remains at pre-COVID-19 levels.
"The gains that we've seen in children using our products have sustained even as kids have gone back to school," Katz said.
After so many years of investors often ignoring the industry, the attention is welcome to companies like Age of Learning.
"We know a fair amount about what could work," Lynch said. "We don't have all the necessary components of an ecosystem yet, maybe COVID will be the catalyst that we needed."
Read moreShow less
Sarah Favot
Favot is an award-winning journalist and adjunct instructor at USC's Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. She previously was an investigative and data reporter at national education news site The 74 and local news site LA School Report. She's also worked at the Los Angeles Daily News. She was a Livingston Award finalist in 2011 and holds a Master's degree in journalism from Boston University and BA from the University of Windsor in Ontario, Canada.
Sand, Sunglasses, Tech Bros: Has L.A. Outgrown the Name 'Silicon Beach'?
07:30 AM | February 27, 2020
Photo illustration for dot.LA by Candice Navi
From the moment the Silicon Beach moniker first appeared, it has been disliked and even despised by those in the place it's supposed to describe as too derivative, too playful, and too limiting for a tech scene that now stretches well beyond the sand and rarely involves silicon.
Just as Los Angeles writ large is still mocked as a vapid wasteland of botox, juice cleanses, and influencers, Silicon Beach conjures up images of flip flop-wearing tech bros playing ping pong at The Bungalow and bronzing at the Little Beach House Malibu.
In reality, during the past decade the area's tech scene – propelled by multi billion dollar acquisitions like Honey and IPO's like Snap – has matured considerably. Venture investment in the greater L.A. area skyrocketed from $1.6 billion in 2010 to $7.8 billion last year, according to data from PWC.
But Silicon Beach can't manage to shake its childhood nickname.
"I do feel really strongly that using that term is really not doing a service to L.A. and is misleading and we should aspire to do better," said Kara Nortman, partner at Upfront Ventures. "The word 'beach' evokes a particular image which is fun and happy and playful but does not represent a majority of what L.A. has become. I think we're so much more than the beach."
Despite a revulsion for the name, it has endured because if not Silicon Beach, what should L.A.'s tech scene be called? No one has managed to come up with anything better even though this is an industry brimming with marketing talent that has to invent catchy new names and slogans everyday.
And it is not as if the phrase is only now facing a backlash. It has been reviled for years, likened to a "poor man's Silicon Valley" as early as 2011.
When Mark Suster, managing partner at Upfront Ventures, was asked by a Recode reporter about Silicon Beach in 2014 he did not respond kindly. "If you even publish those words, it will make me scream and pull out my hair and scratch my fingers on the chalkboard," he said. "No serious professional — no serious professional in L.A. — talks about 'Silicon Beach.' There are a bunch of early-stage young inexperienced party-boy-type people who promoted the nickname. And let me say this to you: The most successful L.A. startups have all been founded east of the 405 freeway."
Suster's outburst was prompted by a meeting he was invited to of prominent VCs and founders in Culver City organized by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation. The sole purpose of the gathering was to abolish the phrase Silicon Beach.
The effort was remarkably unsuccessful. Today there is Silicon Beach Fest, Silicon Beach Professionals, Silicon Beach Talent, Silicon Beach Homes, Silicon Beach Magazine, and when it all gets to be too much there's even a Silicon Beach Treatment Center. When The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal describe L.A. tech, the preferred moniker is Silicon Beach. Fortune Magazine writes about the "Silicon Beach Surfers."
Where did 'Silicon Beach' Come From?
What few people realize is that Silicon Beach has only been used to describe the Santa Monica/Venice/Marina del Rey area relatively recently in its transitory lifespan.
The name initially described an area in South Florida in the early 1980s where IBM Corp. launched its personal computer in 1981. A quick Lexis-Nexis search reveals the first time it appeared in print referring to Southern California was in a San Diego Union-Tribune article about a San Diego computer expo trade show in 1985 with this lede: "The city with the fourth-highest concentration of high-tech firms in the nation — was well represented at the sixth annual COMDEX. Our version of Silicon Valley (Silicon Beach, perhaps?)"
The article included this improvident quote from Edward Savarese, president of Personal Computer Products Inc, who said the computer market had grown oversaturated: "Venture capital for high-tech start-ups is gone, it's history."
Three years later, civic boosters in Irvine started to adopt the phrase to attract more tech companies to Orange County. By the 1990s, Santa Barbara co opted the term. Some in L.A. wanted it for themselves, but they discovered the name was already taken, much to the amusement of techies up North.
"As L.A. drives into the Information Age, what it really seeks is a nickname with the cachet and punch of a term like 'Silicon Valley,' sneered the San Jose Mercury News in 1998. "Unfortunately, that's been taken. As has pretty much Silicon Everything-Else. And that's the problem that has stumped a committee of industry leaders and city officials, chaired by L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan. The committee is trying to come up with a nickname that would advertise the city's growing number of high-tech companies."
Much like the 2014 Culver City meeting, Riordan's committee never came up with anything better. More than a decade later – as the South Florida, San Diego, Irvine, and Santa Barbara tech scenes were eclipsed – Silicon Beach took hold again, this time in its current iteration.
"The city is earning a wholly different nickname as startups like Hooky, and social networking and other tech firms vie for the city's sunlit offices and creative campuses, wrote the Los Angeles Business Journal in 2011. "That new nickname? Silicon Beach."
In search of a better name
Silicon Beach's usage seems to have peaked some time ago.
"There was a bit of a movement five to seven years ago when it got used a bunch but I don't hear it much anymore," said Dustin Rosen, managing partner at Wonder Ventures.
When the phrase is uttered, it's more often said by those from out of town.
"You'll hear Silicon Beach from people from the Bay Area talking about L.A. but people from L.A. rarely refer to themselves as Silicon Beach," said Amanda Groves, partner at PLUS Capital.
But if not Silicon Beach, what should L.A.'s tech community be called?
"L.A. tech works for me," said Nortman, who also uses #LongLA, which she prefers because it connotes someone who is not just a carpetbagger. "It's come to mean you're investing in the long term of L.A. and you believe in it."
Rosen says he uses "L.A. tech ecosystem" or "L.A. tech community."
Then, a few minutes later he lowers his voice and makes a grave confession: He still uses Silicon Beach occasionally.
"I start from a place that if people are referring to tech activity in L.A. in a positive light then I'm not going to judge what terminology they're using," he said.
From Your Site Articles
- Michael Lynton Compares Los Angeles to San Francisco - dot.LA ›
- 20 Los Angeles Tech Twitter Users to Follow - dot.LA ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read moreShow less
la techhoneySnapupfront venturesmark susterrichard riordanplus capital(don't call it) silicon beachlos angeles tech scene
Ben Bergman
Ben Bergman is the newsroom's senior finance reporter. Previously he was a senior business reporter and host at KPCC, a senior producer at Gimlet Media, a producer at NPR's Morning Edition, and produced two investigative documentaries for KCET. He has been a frequent on-air contributor to business coverage on NPR and Marketplace and has written for The New York Times and Columbia Journalism Review. Ben was a 2017-2018 Knight-Bagehot Fellow in Economic and Business Journalism at Columbia Business School. In his free time, he enjoys skiing, playing poker, and cheering on The Seattle Seahawks.
RELATEDTRENDING
LA TECH JOBS