

Planet Labs Raises $118M Series C to Cover the Earth in Tiny Satellites - ebildsten
http://techcrunch.com/2015/04/13/planet-labs-rockets-to-118-million-in-series-c-funding-to-cover-the-earth-in-tiny-satellites/

======
kartikkumar
Planet Labs is doing a great job of raising the profile of NewSpace [1]. I met
Will Marshall when I was interning at NASA Ames in 2007. He was setting up
their Mission Design Center. I remember they were working on PhoneSat at the
time [2]. There was generally a mood of change at Ames, backed by a great
administrator, Pete Worden.

I was at the 1st Startup Weekend dedicated to Space this weekend in Bremen,
Germany [3]. It was a fascinating weekend and a great opportunity to explore
many NewSpace ideas. Chris Boshuizen gave a remote talk on the Friday. They’re
differentiating themselves from the competition through their high repeat rate
and I think they have a lot of interesting avenues for growth ahead.

It’s good to see institutional investors getting involved in NewSpace. Nikunj
is a family friend; I’m looking forward to picking his brain about this deal
and his view of the market. Space Angels Network [4] is also doing a great job
of raising the profile of this new industry. Hopefully, we see a lot more
investment in basic products and services that will open up a tremendous
number of space-based applications in the coming decade.

Congrats to the Planet Labs guys!

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewSpace](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewSpace)

[2] [http://www.phonesat.org/](http://www.phonesat.org/)

[3] [http://www.up.co/communities/germany/bremen/startup-
weekend/...](http://www.up.co/communities/germany/bremen/startup-weekend/5485)

[4] [http://spaceangelsnetwork.com/](http://spaceangelsnetwork.com/)

------
vonklaus
Ever since Steve Jurvetson mentioned these guys, I have been super excited to
see what is going to happen in full earth imagery. A lot of talk has centered
around traffic recognition (either predictive patterns for motorways, or store
commerce based on volume flux), crops and agriculture, climate recog (polar
caps, rainforests) etc. It is going to be exciting to see what developers do
when the API is rolled out in a much sharper cadence.

------
jf
Naturally, Planet is hiring:
[https://www.planet.com/careers/#openings](https://www.planet.com/careers/#openings)

------
fixxer
Reminds me of this:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_debris](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_debris)

~~~
grinich

        We always ensure that our satellites are well below the 
        UN 25 year guideline, and we will never launch a satellite
        into an orbit with a predicted lifetime greater than 25 years.
    

[https://www.planet.com/pulse/keeping-space-clean-
responsible...](https://www.planet.com/pulse/keeping-space-clean-responsible-
satellite-fleet-operations/)

~~~
classicsnoot
Question for you sir[?]: is it possible to build a massive radio antenna array
outside of the atmosphere using a widely spread out constellation of
satellites? Like, something of a dimension and intensity that would be
impossible/unsafe to do on the earth's surface? My apologies if this is a dumb
question...

~~~
vonklaus
I am not GP, but if you are interested in satellite communication networks,
spaceX and google have partnered to do something similar. It will have some
extra-terrestrial advantages like needing less hops to get to destination and
light moves faster in a vacuum.

link: [http://spacenews.com/spacex-google-matchup-sets-up-
satellite...](http://spacenews.com/spacex-google-matchup-sets-up-satellite-
internet-scramble/)

~~~
classicsnoot
This may sound crazy, but i was talking about a transmitter and i was thinking
about it being pointed outward, not inward. I am of the opinion that crafted
radio signals are the easiest and most efficient way to tell 'whoever' that
someone is here and they know math. The constellation would serve two
purposes: let asteroid miners listen to NPR outside of the control of NASA or
Weyland-Yutani and broadcast a signal to the universe that we are here. I will
not be offended by the wave of chortles. Also, i imagine a radio telescope
that stretches 300,000 miles might be able to pick up a lot we cannot see.

~~~
Animats
There's no particular advantage to putting an interstellar transmitter in
orbit. Attenuation on the way up isn't a huge problem. Arecibo could in theory
communicate with a similar installation across about 10,000 light years.[1]

[1]
[http://www.setileague.org/articles/oseti.htm](http://www.setileague.org/articles/oseti.htm)

~~~
classicsnoot
Thank you for the link; i will read it. I get that 'they' could detect each
other, but wouldn't it make detection much easier if the signal was stronger?

~~~
branchan
He is saying that it won't be much stronger.

------
grandalf
I met Chris one time and he's super smart. Great job guys!

Some stunningly creative technology too.

------
gtirloni
Could someone more knowledgeable about this field explain what advantages this
would have over the incumbents?

~~~
sparkman55
For a long time, public satellite imagery came from satellites flown by the US
Geological Survey (USGS). They came in two flavors: geostationary and low-
earth orbit.

The geostationary satellites are perched very high above the earth, and take
frequent pictures of the 'full disk' of earth. This is invaluable for weather
forecasting, as we can see what clouds are doing in real time. However, they
are so far away that you need big, expensive satellites and big, expensive
launches, and the resulting resolution is quite poor (like one pixel per 5km
depending on latitude, and worse at high latitudes).

On the other hand, the low-earth orbit satellites fly just above the
atmosphere, and can take pictures at much higher (spatial) resolution, but may
only fly over a particular spot of land once per day. So you trade temporal
resolution for spatial resolution.

With miniaturization, advances in imaging and related technology, and
decreasing launch costs, it should be possible to deploy a constellation of
small low-earth-orbit satellites, to provide good temporal AND spatial
resolution. That enables a whole bunch of new applications.

However, I'd be a bit concerned that long-lived airborne drones flying at high
altitudes might do the same thing (good spatial AND temporal resolution), but
at a lower price point and in a more efficient way (since you only fly where
you want to look, instead of covering the entire globe).

Perhaps I'm missing something?

~~~
andygates
Drones have to worry about airspace rules, which satellites do not.

One advantage they're keen to promote is that a 15-year lifespan sat has, by
the end of its life, a 15-year-old camera. Technology marches on, and small
cheap (nearly disposable!) satellites can just roll improvements into their
replacement cycle in a way that the big boys can't.

~~~
Already__Taken
Since we're talking of comparing drones though, that camera argument doesn't
work out since you can just land the drone and bolt a new one on.

Do airspace laws still go all the way up to if you can fly at say 60-80,00ft?
I guess they must, we're talking about private spy planes aren't we.

------
flavio87
congrats to Will, Robbie, Chris and the entire team. to the moon and more :)

------
binoyxj
Latest feature on Planet Labs
[http://news.sciencemag.org/space/2015/04/feature-how-tiny-
sa...](http://news.sciencemag.org/space/2015/04/feature-how-tiny-satellites-
spawned-silicon-valley-will-monitor-changing-earth)

------
ay1n
I'm curious how much equity founders have after such investment with so many
investors? I know there's no standard rule here, but I don't know anything
about investors, raising money etc., could someone give me few examples with
real life numbers?

~~~
grinich
Planet Labs has raised a total of $160.1 million in funding across 4 disclosed
rounds.[1] I'm going to assume there was also an angel round. Here is some
(super) rough math:

    
    
        | Round     | $ in MM  |  post-$  | non-VC % |
        |-----------|----------|----------|----------|
        | Founding  |    -     |    -     |    100   |
        | Angel     |   1      |    10    |      90  |
        | Series A  |   13.1   |    50    |      75  |
        | Series B  |   52     |    225   |      58  |
        | Series C  |   118    |    550   |      45  |
    
    

Note this announcement is the "second closing" of the 95MM Series C from
January[2], which means the terms are very likely identical. The WSJ reported
the Series C valuation as "materially above" 500 million.[3]

I picked these valuations out of thin air. The only "standard" thing I've seen
is that most VC funds are structured for 20% minimum stake in Series A rounds.
Later-stage rounds often target less ownership.

The above calculation doesn't take into account any stock for employees. With
that, I'd estimate the founders still collectively own about 30-35% of the
company.

This could also be totally wrong, since I have no idea what the real numbers
are. But as an exercise, you get the idea. :)

[1] [https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/planet-
labs](https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/planet-labs)

[2] [http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/20/planet-
labs-95m/](http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/20/planet-labs-95m/)

[3] [http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2015/01/23/data-
collecti...](http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2015/01/23/data-collective-
tapped-its-new-growth-fund-for-planet-labs-deal/)

~~~
nedwin
If we forget about the percentages they own and focus on the value of their
stock we see that their stock goes likes this: $0 $9m $37.5m $130.5m $247.5m

I suspect that the founder ownership percentages are actually lower than
you've suggested and that right now they own somewhere around 20 to 30% which
is still valued at $110m to $165m.

~~~
grinich
Sure, share price is what you use to calculate the dollar value of the stock.
But percentage is more useful for determine voting power.

Is there a specific valuation here you think is too high an estimate?

~~~
nedwin
Maybe percentage determines voting power but there are plenty of mechanisms
that can and are used to retain control at the equity percentages we are
talking about.

------
mrfusion
Why can't we put cameras on the proposed Leo Internet satellites? Wouldn't
that give us a huge leap in coverage?

------
vollmarj
Congrats Planet! Now please add more spectral bands to your satellites so they
can be useful for agriculture.

------
netcan
What can you say other than... cool.

~~~
hga
I can say "creepy" ... e.g. sooner or later, anytime I walk outside, there's
going to be one or more microsats "watching" me. Yeah, I know it's "nothing
personal" ... today.

Makes me wonder about adding "Procure a personal ASAT system" to my dream list
for the future.

~~~
netcan
That sort of creepiness, privacy concerns or whatnot are valid, but I think
they almost need to be isolated out of such conversations.

The world is changing fast with all sorts of relevance in that realm. I think
it's almost futile for us to try and comprehend how this stuff will work and
how we feel about it. History is often notionally zeroed at the invention of
written records. The king of an illiterate realm is prehistoric while
Nebuchadnezzar or Hammurabi are historic rulers, leaving behind an intentional
record from their times.

There are people today with thousands of hours of HD video and audio records.
Facebook photos. HN debates. You can know who they are and how they think, to
an extent, from those records. Their great grandchildren will be able to too.
This is getting stronger. The quantity and quality of information being
recorded is enormous. You might call it post-history. The period abbot which
our level of knowledge is as complete as it is about the present.

I think it's the kind of great change that can't be understood from foresight.

------
hellbanner
Including war zones?

~~~
branchan
Yes:

[http://www.skybox.com/blog/attack-on-tripoli-
international-a...](http://www.skybox.com/blog/attack-on-tripoli-
international-airport)

~~~
hellbanner
Interesting. A while back on HN there was discussion of some actor (Tom
Cruise??) using satellites to free child soldiers or something.. and
conspiciously absent of pointing out the wars in the middle east

