5 ms·

Show HN: Startup data 2000-2012 from CrunchBase

60 points by miquelcamps 14y ago

aaasen 14y ago
It's crazy that there are so many huge companies that I've never heard of. Instagram's acquisition was huge news at $1B, but I didn't hear a peep about Ariba at $4.3B or Genzyme at $20B. It's easy to think that consumer oriented web startups are what's hot, but this data proves otherwise.
- waterlesscloud 14y ago
  I wonder if a lot of the "there's no innovation any more" talk is a result of the fact that things like biotech just doesn't get the same coverage as the web startups? There's a lot of biotech/pharmacutecal companies in those lists. Something is happening in that industry, even if we don't hear much about it here and elsewhere.
- jpdoctor 14y ago
  > It's easy to think that consumer oriented web startups are what's hot, but this data proves otherwise. I think what it proves: Crunchbase serves the PR segment of consumer oriented web companies, and fails to serve other segments well. Let's face it, it's not so much a database as it is part of the techcrunch PR machine.
- hkmurakami 14y ago
  One thing to consider is how long each of these companies hd been in existence before getting acquired. One thing with consumer web is that the time between conception and exit is comparatively short compared to other industries.
minimaxir 14y ago
Which endpoint(s) of the CrunchBase API are you using? I'm planning on doing something similar graphically.
- miquelcamps 14y ago
  honestly I have not used the API, i've done some web scraping, if you want you can download the database here ;) https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip
  - minimaxir 14y ago
    That works too. :P Thanks!
  - skhamkar 14y ago
    Thanks! This is pretty cool data.
  - wilson_guaraca 14y ago
    Hey Miguel! I am currently writing a thesis on venture capital and I have similar data from a database called VentureXpert. I will share it with you via twitter once I finish in a couple of weeks. I am curious to see how different our data looks. Thanks for posting. Twitter: @wguaraca
jpdoctor 14y ago
Crunchbase is pretty incomplete before 2004 it seems. Several of the comm companies I checked were missing. Edit: Upon further testing, it seems that many of the communications wipeouts ($40+M) from that era are missing. It's almost as if the people who funded them don't want the magnitude of the mistakes in the record. Here's an example: Photonex, raised $170M [1] over the course of their lifetime and not a trace on crunchbase of who the culprits were. Another quick example: Solinet [2] raised a pile of dough (they later renamed themselves Ceyba). [1] http://www.lightreading.com/ip-convergence/photonex-scores-huge-3rd-round/240045206 http://www.lightreading.com/ip-convergence/photonex-scores-h... [2] http://www.lightreading.com/ip-convergence/solinet-systems-scores-93-million/240048732 http://www.lightreading.com/ip-convergence/solinet-systems-s...
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
ig1 14y ago
(I run SeedTable which also does analytics on Crunchbase data) The problem with ranking by funding/acquisition amounts is the data is pretty dirty, and outliers are disproportionately likely to be incorrect data (because someone fat fingered a number to be an order of magnitude larger, or put a foreign currency amount in as USD). Although the acq data is better than the funding data. You might also want to extract stuff like biotech from the data because it's fundamentally a completely separate market from software tech.
- ipedrazas 14y ago
  Still, on that table we can see that on 2012 there was less funding and less acquisition. Will be interesting to see what happens during 2013 but it seems that there's not as much money as on 2010/2011
  - ig1 14y ago
    Yes the counted metrics are much more reliable. It's much harder for TC to misenter an acquisition/funding round then it is for them accidentally add an extra zero to a number.
hkmurakami 14y ago
For funding categories by year, I really think it would be nicer/more-useful if we could look at a time-series line graph by sector over a longer time period (5+ years) to see trends.
ronnix 14y ago
Were some companies acquired multiple times the same year, or is there a bug somewhere? (RazorFish is listed 3 times in 2002, DoubleClick and Skype twice in 2005, Getty Images twice in 2008, Sterling Commerce twice in 2009.)
- miquelcamps 14y ago
  ouch! fixed, thanks :)
ev_ancasey 14y ago
cool stuff. how are you grouping data startups within the funding categories section? i'd be interested to see the breakdown in recent years of startups that offer a data product, i.e. data infrastructure, ad optimization, user tracking, etc
- miquelcamps 14y ago
  I would like to be more specific with the categories, but crunchbase for the most of internet based startups the main category is "Consumer Web". Example: http://www.crunchbase.com/company/rent-com http://www.crunchbase.com/company/rent-com If you want, you can download the database and check the companies table https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip
bdcravens 14y ago
T-Mobile is listed as the top acquisition of 2011, but that deal was blocked by the DoJ and later dropped by AT&T. In other words, the charts are based on announcements, not necessarily consummated transactions.
- samspenc 14y ago
  Exactly what I was thinking.
sylvinus 14y ago
Funny that the 3 "top paying" acquirers are telcos and not Googles :)
ejfox 14y ago
Hello I'd like your data please.
- miquelcamps 14y ago
  You can download it here ;) https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip
  - kevin_morrill 14y ago
    Is your list of companies in this db everything in their entity list of companies, or just ones that got acquired?
    - miquelcamps 14y ago
      there are 4 tables: - acquisitions (date, target, acquirer, price) - companies (date, name, description, category, url, twitter) - funding (date, company, round, size, investors) - words (for the tagcloud)
skhamkar 14y ago
Here are some links to CSV files based on miquelcamps's sql file. Acquisitions http://db.tt/h6PoPnCn http://db.tt/h6PoPnCn Companies http://db.tt/UNYulmJD http://db.tt/UNYulmJD Funding http://db.tt/SHa45HHc http://db.tt/SHa45HHc Words http://db.tt/mJMCIREX http://db.tt/mJMCIREX

60 points by miquelcamps 14y ago

It's crazy that there are so many huge companies that I've never heard of. Instagram's acquisition was huge news at $1B, but I didn't hear a peep about Ariba at $4.3B or Genzyme at $20B. It's easy to think that consumer oriented web startups are what's hot, but this data proves otherwise.

waterlesscloud 14y ago
I wonder if a lot of the "there's no innovation any more" talk is a result of the fact that things like biotech just doesn't get the same coverage as the web startups? There's a lot of biotech/pharmacutecal companies in those lists. Something is happening in that industry, even if we don't hear much about it here and elsewhere.
jpdoctor 14y ago
> It's easy to think that consumer oriented web startups are what's hot, but this data proves otherwise. I think what it proves: Crunchbase serves the PR segment of consumer oriented web companies, and fails to serve other segments well. Let's face it, it's not so much a database as it is part of the techcrunch PR machine.
hkmurakami 14y ago
One thing to consider is how long each of these companies hd been in existence before getting acquired. One thing with consumer web is that the time between conception and exit is comparatively short compared to other industries.

minimaxir 14y ago

Which endpoint(s) of the CrunchBase API are you using? I'm planning on doing something similar graphically.

miquelcamps 14y ago
honestly I have not used the API, i've done some web scraping, if you want you can download the database here ;) https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip
- minimaxir 14y ago
  That works too. :P Thanks!
- skhamkar 14y ago
  Thanks! This is pretty cool data.
- wilson_guaraca 14y ago
  Hey Miguel! I am currently writing a thesis on venture capital and I have similar data from a database called VentureXpert. I will share it with you via twitter once I finish in a couple of weeks. I am curious to see how different our data looks. Thanks for posting. Twitter: @wguaraca

jpdoctor 14y ago

Crunchbase is pretty incomplete before 2004 it seems. Several of the comm companies I checked were missing. Edit: Upon further testing, it seems that many of the communications wipeouts ($40+M) from that era are missing. It's almost as if the people who funded them don't want the magnitude of the mistakes in the record. Here's an example: Photonex, raised $170M [1] over the course of their lifetime and not a trace on crunchbase of who the culprits were. Another quick example: Solinet [2] raised a pile of dough (they later renamed themselves Ceyba). [1] http://www.lightreading.com/ip-convergence/photonex-scores-huge-3rd-round/240045206 http://www.lightreading.com/ip-convergence/photonex-scores-h... [2] http://www.lightreading.com/ip-convergence/solinet-systems-scores-93-million/240048732 http://www.lightreading.com/ip-convergence/solinet-systems-s...

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

ig1 14y ago

(I run SeedTable which also does analytics on Crunchbase data) The problem with ranking by funding/acquisition amounts is the data is pretty dirty, and outliers are disproportionately likely to be incorrect data (because someone fat fingered a number to be an order of magnitude larger, or put a foreign currency amount in as USD). Although the acq data is better than the funding data. You might also want to extract stuff like biotech from the data because it's fundamentally a completely separate market from software tech.

ipedrazas 14y ago
Still, on that table we can see that on 2012 there was less funding and less acquisition. Will be interesting to see what happens during 2013 but it seems that there's not as much money as on 2010/2011
- ig1 14y ago
  Yes the counted metrics are much more reliable. It's much harder for TC to misenter an acquisition/funding round then it is for them accidentally add an extra zero to a number.

hkmurakami 14y ago

For funding categories by year, I really think it would be nicer/more-useful if we could look at a time-series line graph by sector over a longer time period (5+ years) to see trends.

ronnix 14y ago

Were some companies acquired multiple times the same year, or is there a bug somewhere? (RazorFish is listed 3 times in 2002, DoubleClick and Skype twice in 2005, Getty Images twice in 2008, Sterling Commerce twice in 2009.)

miquelcamps 14y ago
ouch! fixed, thanks :)

ev_ancasey 14y ago

cool stuff. how are you grouping data startups within the funding categories section? i'd be interested to see the breakdown in recent years of startups that offer a data product, i.e. data infrastructure, ad optimization, user tracking, etc

miquelcamps 14y ago
I would like to be more specific with the categories, but crunchbase for the most of internet based startups the main category is "Consumer Web". Example: http://www.crunchbase.com/company/rent-com http://www.crunchbase.com/company/rent-com If you want, you can download the database and check the companies table https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip

bdcravens 14y ago

T-Mobile is listed as the top acquisition of 2011, but that deal was blocked by the DoJ and later dropped by AT&T. In other words, the charts are based on announcements, not necessarily consummated transactions.

samspenc 14y ago
Exactly what I was thinking.

sylvinus 14y ago

Funny that the 3 "top paying" acquirers are telcos and not Googles :)

ejfox 14y ago

Hello I'd like your data please.

miquelcamps 14y ago
You can download it here ;) https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzhqhtk4g23temz/crunchbase.sql.zip
- kevin_morrill 14y ago
  Is your list of companies in this db everything in their entity list of companies, or just ones that got acquired?
  - miquelcamps 14y ago
    there are 4 tables: - acquisitions (date, target, acquirer, price) - companies (date, name, description, category, url, twitter) - funding (date, company, round, size, investors) - words (for the tagcloud)

skhamkar 14y ago

Here are some links to CSV files based on miquelcamps's sql file. Acquisitions http://db.tt/h6PoPnCn http://db.tt/h6PoPnCn Companies http://db.tt/UNYulmJD http://db.tt/UNYulmJD Funding http://db.tt/SHa45HHc http://db.tt/SHa45HHc Words http://db.tt/mJMCIREX http://db.tt/mJMCIREX