 |
|
|
|||||
In summer 2020, former Evernote CEO Phil Libin launched Mmhmm, a software tool designed to make video presentations look polished, even if the presenter was calling in from a COVID-era makeshift home office. It was one of many products and startups launched during that time, aimed at making the sudden wave of remote meetings more productiveor at least more bearable. While many of those ideas faded as businesses reopenedyou probably haven’t joined a meeting as a cartoon avatar or signed on to a Zoom happy hour latelyLibin’s startup is still going strong. The company, rebranded as Airtime in April, has raised more than $140 million from investors including Sequoia Capital and the SoftBank Vision Fund. It recently announced a second product called Airtime Camera, which gives users a more professional appearance on video calls. More ideas are also in development to enhance the still-ubiquitous videoconferencing experience. “We want to make the essential tools for people who spend a lot of time on video at work,” Libin says. As he points out, that includes just about all knowledge-based workers these days, whether they’re calling in from home, the office, or a bit of both. While the catchy but hard-to-spell name Mmhmm “outlived its usefulness,” as Libin puts it, video communication tools themselves haven’t. The original product, now called Airtime Creator, still lets users record or participate live in video presentations that wouldn’t look out of place on TV or YouTube. Presenters can appear on screen alongside slides, graphs, and images. Some users, including teachers and salespeople, even use the tool to switch between prerecorded video and live Q&A sessions. It’s not unusual for presenters to match their wardrobe to what they wore in the recorded segment, Libin says. [Photo: Airtime] “If anyone asks questions,” Libin says, “they can seamlessly jump into the middle of it, live-answer questions, and then hit play again.” Airtime Camera allows users to set up predefined looks, such as adding a custom background, an overall tint, or displaying an onscreen logo along with their name and job title. The software functions as a virtual camera compatible with Zoom, Teams, and Google Meet. Look templates can be shared across a company, ensuring all representatives maintain the same logo and aestheticmuch like standardized email signatures. Users can also choose custom reactions that go beyond the sometimes cringeworthy thumbs-ups built into conferencing platforms. Airtime Camera ensures a consistently polished and professional look, whether users are at home, in the office, or traveling, according to Libin. “The idea is I can have a consistent, branded, elegant look regardless of where I am,” he says. Additional tools are in development to improve other aspects of video-based work, with at least a couple more expected to launch this summer. [Photo: Airtime] “We were looking for experiences that are ubiquitous and crappy,” Libin says. “And then we just want to make tools to make them less crappy.” Potential additions include software that addresses screen-sharing frustrations or simplifies the scheduling and rescheduling of video calls. Other ideas focus on how people consume video, helping them catch up on missed discussions without relying on generic AI-generated bullet points or watching full-length recordings. “I’d rather chew my arm off than watch a recording of a Zoom call,” Libin says. Airtime Creator is currently available through a $10-per-month subscription, which also includes access to Airtime Camera, after a free two-week trial. For now, Airtime Camera can also be used for free on its own until August 1, when it will be offered as a one-time stand-alone purchase for $20. Libin says the company plans to continue launching simple, stable, and intuitive software tools. “We’re going to ship the tools as we get them to the stage where we find them indispensable and useful,” he says.
Category:
E-Commerce
Branded is a weekly column devoted to the intersection of marketing, business, design, and culture. Elite law firms like Paul Weiss and Jenner & Block may not advertise in traditional ways, or for a mainstream audience. But they and a handful of other prominent white-shoe firms are in the middle of an unprecedented brand test right now. At issue is how best to respond to pressure from the Trump administration and how that response affects their reputation. That has turned into a branding moment for these firmswhether they like it or not. The full verdict isnt in yet. But those who have chosen to fight executive orders designed to punish firms that President Trump apparently dislikes seem to be faring better, scoring early legal victories and burnishing an image of bravely standing up for principle. Or maybe its more accurate to say that those who have cut deals with the administration (promising a collective $940 million in pro bono work) are, reputationally and perhaps substantively, faring worse: losing partners, angering some clients, and even being labeled The Yellow-Bellied Nine by critical peers. The test began back in March, when Trump signed a series of executive orders restricting security clearances for lawyers and employees of various firms that had represented his perceived enemies or political opponentsa move that would severely cut into their business. The prominent firm Perkins Coie, which among other things had represented Hillary Clintons 2016 campaign, responded by suing the administration. The order was swiftly blocked by a judge who called it chilling. Other targeted firms, including Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey, have won similar blocks. Paul Weiss, one of the most storied and powerful law firms in the world, was among the first to take a different path: In exchange for the administration agreeing to lift an executive order targeting the firm, it agreed to perform $40 million in unpaid legal work for mutually agreed-upon causes and matters. The deal startled (and was immediately criticized by) many legal observers. (In a firm-wide memo, its executive chairman defended the settlement: The resolution we reached with the Administration will have no effect on our work and our shared culture and values.) Lately, Paul Weiss has made headlines for losing several high-profile attorneys, including the cochair of its litigation group, who left with three other partners to form their own firm, and a former U.S. attorney who went to Jenner & Block, which has sued the administration. Eight more major firmsincluding Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis, Simpson Thacher, and Latham & Watkinscut similar deals. Many others have remained above the fray, declining, for example, to join an amicus brief in support of Perkins Coie or others fighting the administration in court. Law firms are often paid to help mitigate risk, but in this case some may have underestimated the risk of brand damage. In the latest sign of tangible reputational fallout, The Wall Street Journal recently reported that at least 11 major companies, including Oracle and Morgan Stanley, are withdrawing business from firms that cut deals to get executive orders lifted or that are otherwise supporting the government in what some view as an effort to warp the legal system. As one client cited by The Journal put it: We prefer to work with law firms willing to fight. More broadly, the divergent response to the executive orders continues to draw scrutiny and controversy within the profession, with the potential to affect both recruiting and retention. Above the Law, a snarky but serious online publication popular with younger lawyers, coined the Yellow-Bellied Nine moniker, and has introduced a “Spine Index” that rates major firms responses to the executive orders (and notes, in addition, those that have scrapped DEI efforts). A survey of its readers found that a vast majority supported firms fighting the orders, and felt that law firms who make agreements with the administration are giving in to extortion, which sends a bad message to the entire profession. Still, while the firms fighting back have been winning new clients and winning in the courts (so far), its hard to gauge how that will ultimately affect their business: Clients who would rather steer clear of potential trouble with Trump arent likely to be very public about distancing themselves from the conflict. Meanwhile, as Above the Law has noted, neither the administration nor the firms that agreed to deals involving pro bono promises have offered up much detail or any sense of timing about those commitments. For Trump, that may be a matter of biding time; for the firms, it may be in hopes that the matter will fade from the court of public opinion.
Category:
E-Commerce
Six years ago, a platform called Loop launched with a bold idea: What if common mass-market productslike Tide detergent or Pantene shampoocame in reusable packaging instead of single-use plastic? The concept took inspiration from the traditional milkman model. Customers would leave empty containers at their doorsteps (or later, return them to participating stores). Loop would collect, sanitize, and refill them, ready to be sold again. Rinse and repeat. Big brands, somewhat surprisingly, signed on quickly. Some developed custom packaging, such as a sleek stainless steel container for Häagen-Dazs ice cream. Major retailers, including Walgreens and Kroger, agreed to join pilots. Consumers liked the idea: when the first U.S. pilot launched with 10,000 customers, nearly 100,000 others joined the waitlist. Loop expanded pilots to other countries. But the pilots ultimately didnt scale up, and eventually shut downexcept in one place. In France, Loop is now in hundreds of stores, and selling more than 400 items, from food to personal care products. It expects to be in as many as 800 stores by the end of the year. Its also finally profitable. We talked to the founders about why the model failed in the U.S., but worked in France. [Photo: Loop] How Loop started When Loop began, plastic waste was a mainstream concern. Consumers wanted alternatives. Companies were facing the possibility that packaging waste might be regulated. Environmental groups were pushing for reuse, not recycling, as the solution. “There was a lot of pressure from that community saying that [brands] need to bring out reusable offerings,” says Tom Szaky, CEO and founder of Terracycle, the company that launched the Loop platform. Terracycle, a private company that Pitchbook reports has raised at least $69 million to date, had always focused on recyclingespecially hard to recycle itemsbut wanted to expand into reuse. [Photos: Loop] The company saw the advantages of returning to a system that worked before disposable packaging became ubiquitous. “Back in the day, packaging was an asset,” Szaky says. “It was the property of the manufacturer, secured by deposit with the consumer. And as a result, the manufacturer was motivated to make this long-lasting and durable.” When disposable packaging became common, companies tried to lower the cost as much as possible. That meant that packaging became less recyclable, because there was less of value to recycle. Terracycle had worked with big brands before on new ways to process hard-to-recycle packaging like candy wrappers. As it reached out to propose a new reuse platform, companies were receptive. More than 200 large consumer packaged goods companies decided to participate, and started exploring how their packaging and processes could adapt to the new system. Companies like Proctor and Gamble and Nestlé joined Loop’s Series A round in 2020, which raised $25 million. [Photo: Loop] The challenge of scaling up from pilotsand how a new law in France made the difference In pilots in the U.S., Canada, UK., Japan, and France, the company tested the business model, consumer demand, and environmental performance. The pilots showed that the system could work, Szaky says. But Loop struggled to convince retailers to add more stores. “The pilots were anywhere from 10 stores to two dozen, and they performed well,” he says. “Consumers liked it. They bought, they returned. Then we kept pushing these retailers saying, ‘Okay, let’s start scaling’–let’s add more store count and more product count. And we couldn’t get anywhere except France.” France had a key difference: it passed a strong law in 2020 that took on plastic waste. One of the provisions was that by 2027, major supermarkets would have to dedicate 10% of their floor space to products in reusable packaging. French law also offered a carrot along with the stick. It charges brands a packaging feeand then gives back funding to help make the switch to reusables. The funds can be used for buying new packaging, making new labels, or paying to be part of a system like Loop. “That helps offset some of the short-term challenges that might make a product less profitable when it’s in 400 or 600 stores versus full national distribution in France, probably 20,000 or 30,000 stores,” Szaky says. In the U.S., there was enough pressure to get support for pilots. But without regulation in place, it was hard to get companies to go farther. “We heard from some retailers who said, look, we don’t really wanna scale this until the regulatory threat is really around the corner,” Szaky says. Smaller-scale pilots are more expensive to run than operating a full system, so eventually, Loop pilots shut down everywhere outside France. Rethinking packaging As France pushed reuse forward, Loop had time to find a solution to another challenge. Some brands had developed creative new packaging for the initial pilots, and even began experimenting with new products like toothpaste tablets as an alternative to toothpaste in a plastic tube. But while brands had the resources to make small pilot runs and then theoretically jump to large-scale production, it wasn’t really feasible to grow more incrementally along with Loop. If you go from supplying a product to 50 stores, to 500, to 3,000, you might need a new packaging manufacturer each time. “Each one of those jumps are potentially a completely different facility with different equipment, different line speeds, all this stuff,” Szaky says. “So they have to keep onboarding different third-party manufacturers. And it’s quite expensive. They have to keep investing and probably losing money on the product until they get to a certain scale.” [Photo: Loop] When he talked to brands, they’d say they couldn’t grow incrementally. “We’d say, hey, guys, it’s great that you’re in 10 stores, and then we would come to them and say, what if we got to 30 stores? Are you ready to go? And they’d say: no. We’re ready to go when you’re at 1,000 stores.” But for Loop, that slower growth was necessary as it built up a full assortment of different products. Now, the company helps brands focus on working as much as possible with existing packaging. In some cases, the package is exactly the same as what’s already on the shelf. A glass bottle for wine or olive oil is already strong enough to withstand repeated cleaning and refilling. A plastic tub of kitty litter can also be cleaned out and refilled. All a company needs to do is add a Loop label to explain to consumers that the package has a deposit, and needs to come back. The reusable system can be cheaper for brands. “The brand doesn’t have to buy the bottle again,” Szaky says. “It’s that they just pay for the collection and sorting and cleaning, which is cheaper than buying a new bottle.” In some cases, stores have switched to only stocking a reusable version of the package. Consumers can also sometimes save money. Szaky shared a photo of a whiskey bottle with both a reusable and standard version on a French grocery shelf. The reusable bottle costs slightly less up front, and when someone returns it to collect their deposit, they end up saving around 69 cents. [Photo: Loop] A focus on convenience As France pushes reuse forward, other models are also showing up in stores. Some brands offer concentrated products, such as tablets for soap that you add to a bottle with water. But Szaky argues that while these products sell well online, it’s harder to convince a consumer looking at a traditional, full bottle on a shelf not to go for a product that looks bigger. (It also only works for certain products: you can’t really sell a concentrated candy bar.) French retailers are also offering more products in bulk. But that’s a little more work both for retailers and for consumers, who have to clean their own packaging. Again, it doesn’t work for every product. Disposable packaging was successful because it was so easy to use; Loop is attempting to come as close as it can to that convenience. Stores can shelve products in the same way that they did with reusable packaging. Consumers don’t have to bother trying to clean out packaging when they return it to the store. It still wants to go further. The company is now talking to waste management companies in France about curbside pickup, which could be feasible if reusables are adopted by around 10% of the population. If it can reach that point, then throwing the packaging in a bin for pickup would be as simple as throwing it in the trash, and retailers wouldn’t have the extra work of handling returned packages. Regulation is key As Loop proves out the model in France, it hopes to move to other countries when similar regulation goes into effect. The EU passed a packaging law that also includes reuse provisions, and will go into effect next year. In countries like Spain and the Netherlands, “we see very short-term opportunity, where those same carrots and sticks have emerged or will very soon,” Szaky says. There’s a push for a similar law in Australia. In the U.S., while a federal law supporting reuse is vanishingly unlikely at the moment, it’s possible that a large state like California could put something similar in place. Reuse systems “require regulation, or otherwise they won’t happen,” Szaky says. “Public pressure is not enough for a system like we use to work. It can’t work with one product or in one retailer, it has to be a huge ecosystem of products, and an ecosystem of retailers. Otherwise, it’s very hard for a consumer to adopt.” The evidence from France could help convince lawmakers elsewhere. “This is functioning today in France at scale every day,” he says. “It’s getting bigger, but already has some good scale to it. And reuse does work. It economically works.”
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||