Source Code: Your daily look at what matters in tech.

source-codesource codeauthorIssie LapowskyNoneWant your finger on the pulse of everything that's happening in tech? Sign up to get David Pierce's daily newsletter.64fd3cbe9f
×

Get access to Protocol

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
People

'This happened very fast': How Giphy's founders fast-tracked the Facebook deal

Giphy investor John Borthwick on why the $400 million deal made sense and what this means for the company's other integrations.

Mark Zuckerberg eating dry toast

TFW you just bought all the GIFs.

GIF: Mashable via Giphy

John Borthwick was one of Giphy's first believers. The company, which Facebook just bought for a reported $400 million, launched in 2013 out of Betaworks, Borthwick's startup studio, with a plan to build a search engine for GIFs.

Seven years later, Giphy isn't just a company: It's the chief purveyor of an international language for what Borthwick calls the "post-literate media" era. Little wonder, then, that Facebook, which already owns the dominant communication channels for some 3 billion people around the world, would want to own that language, too.

But what will regulators concerned with how Facebook has used acquisitions to build its dominance and shore up its relevance have to say about the deal? And what does it mean for Giphy's future on competing platforms?

Shortly after the news broke, Protocol spoke with Borthwick, one of Giphy's early investors and board members, about these issues — and if this is part of a COVID-19 buying spree for tech giants.

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

When you first encountered Giphy, did you think it was a $400 million idea?

It struck me as a big opportunity.

We used to run programs at Betaworks called Hackers in Residence. We'd have a group of hackers who would come build companies. [Giphy founders] Alex Chung and Jace Cooke were working on a different company, and one weekend at the end of January 2013, they said to me, "Hey we just spent a weekend and stood up this thing called Giphy." It really happened very spontaneously.

The idea really grew out of a pre-Slack chat room called BetaChat, which all the team were on. They were sharing GIFs all the time. I often refer to Giphy in the early years as post-literate media. That was a reference to just how much media has shortened, 140 characters and all that stuff. But it's also a reference to how Giphy has made the world so visual.

We grabbed everybody on the team and said, forget everything else you're doing and do this. Then there was a Mashable article about it, and the site went down. Then we said, "We're going to add more people to this." Then we set it up as a company.

It's always hard at that early stage to see if something is going to be a persistently new phenomenon or whether it pivots to something else or whether it fails. But we certainly believed in it.

How did the Facebook deal come about?

Facebook has been a big partner for a long time. They have this base-level API integration into Instagram, Facebook, Messenger, WhatsApp, all the properties. That formed the basis for ongoing discussions. This really grew out of that. The Facebook guys in their blog post mentioned Giphy's traffic most days is about 50% from Facebook properties. That beckoned the discussion very quickly.

Did the Giphy team go to Facebook, or did Facebook approach Giphy with this deal?

I think it's the latter, but the discussions were ongoing between the two parties.

Since we're all working from home now, how did it happen? Did it all happen on Zoom?

This happened very fast. The team has spent a ton of time on Zoom just working through this. I do think the fact that the companies knew each other well, through the API partnership, which they had for like seven years, probably made this happen. I just wonder if there'd been no human connection [whether it would have]. There's a lot of trust that has to be built into a conversation. But if we worked together for seven years and another party said, "Can we finally do this?" It's easier. Not easier, but it's possible over video.

When you say very fast, how fast?

All this started in the post-COVID era. Probably end of March. Figuring something out like this in six weeks is fast. [Borthwick later clarified that conversations about the deal had been ongoing for months.]

Did they come to you to ask for advice on this, and what kind of advice did you offer?

Yes. Again I'll go back to the fact that the company has a partnership with them. They knew the Facebook people well. Giphy is going to be a standalone property within Facebook. It's going to operate next to or in partnership with Instagram, but it's going to be a standalone business. It's going to keep its brand and so on. There's obviously all the financial aspects to a deal like this, but there's also the operating aspect. I spent quite a bit of time with the team trying to figure out if this is the right fit and if this is what they want to do.

John Borthwick John Borthwick says of potential antitrust scrutiny of the Facebook-Giphy deal, "That makes no sense to me. It's a new category." Photo: Wes Bruer/Bloomberg via Getty Images.

There's been so much reporting about how Instagram's founders and WhatsApp's founders wanted to retain their autonomy, and how, as they lost that autonomy, they left. Was that part of the discussion, and how did they grapple with that?

Generically, yes, but nothing specific to Instagram or WhatsApp and their founding team. They don't know the dynamics there.

How important was it that they remain autonomous and have control over their company even if they're giving up financial control?

I think that was pretty important to them.

What kind of guarantees did they seek or get?

That's really for them to speak to, not me. I think so much of this is about the people, and I think they have a very good relationship with the current team at Instagram and at Facebook. I would hope that wouldn't change. If all those people change it could become … Yeah. It's complicated.

What's your understanding of what Facebook wants with it?

I think that Facebook and a bunch of other companies recognize this is media within messaging. You see these platforms moving toward streaming services, video and so on. Giphy's turning out to be one of the most powerful promotion platforms for a lot of that video. You can see how that's strategic.

It's kind of like Quibi. I know Quibi's doing something different. But it's still short form, video-based. How can you create media that's really shareable and short form and can play anywhere? Oh wait, that's GIFs.

There's been some speculation that big companies are going to go on a buying spree because COVID-19 has lots of smaller companies in a bind. Some members of Congress are trying to prevent mergers and acquisitions right now. Is this an example of a COVID-19 purchase that wouldn't have happened before?

I don't think so. I think it made complete strategic sense beforehand. If you look at the Twitter feed, a whole bunch of people I saw today are already saying, "Oh wow, surprised this didn't happen earlier. That's so obvious, why didn't that happen a year ago?" You go back to that 50% traffic number. It was close to that a year ago.

Was Giphy in financial trouble?

No, Giphy has investors. Those investors have a bunch of money.

Were there any discussions or concerns about antitrust scrutiny from regulators?

I don't want to comment on that. I don't believe so. That makes no sense to me. It's a new category. What else could you think of in that category? People's personal photos? YouTube? Quibi? [laughs]

What does this mean for Giphy's integrations off of Facebook?

The answer is: I don't know. The plan certainly is not for any of that to change. [Note: In a blog post, Giphy's team said the integrations aren't going anywhere.] And if you use YouTube as an analogy, there are a lot of competitors who use YouTube on their services or webpages or embed YouTube videos. Sure, if you put YouTube videos on Twitter, then Google gets to see the traffic on that and the usage patterns on that.

I think GIFs are such a part of the language of the web today, and particularly a part of the language of messaging, that I think that's going to continue. I would expect it's going to be broadly available everywhere. And I would hope so.

But like Google and YouTube, Facebook would be able to see how people are using it on those platforms?

Yeah. Facebook is going to have that data now. [Borthwick later clarified that Facebook will get access to data about content and search, not private user information from third-party platforms.]

Was that a concern or part of the conversation in advance of the decision to sell?

Not that I was privy to, but I'm involved in a small subset of the conversations.

Was this a cash or stock deal?

No comment. The total amount is being reported. But no comment on the breakdown.

What's your reaction when you hear people pronounce it Jiffy?

I come down firmly on the side of Giphy. I once had David Cameron, when he was prime minister of England, come by Betaworks, and he looked at me with a straight face and said, "I'm so fascinated to see BEEtaworks."

So yeah. I come down hard on the side of Giphy.

UPDATE: After the publication of this story, Borthwick clarified that conversations about the deal had been ongoing for months, and that Facebook will get access to data about content and search, not private user information from third-party platforms. This story was updated on May 15, 2020.

Protocol | Workplace

In Silicon Valley, it’s February 2020 all over again

"We'll reopen when it's right, but right now the world is changing too much."

Tech companies are handling the delta variant in differing ways.

Photo: alvarez/Getty Images

It's still 2021, right? Because frankly, it's starting to feel like March 2020 all over again.

Google, Apple, Uber and Lyft have now all told employees they won't have to come back to the office before October as COVID-19 case counts continue to tick back up. Facebook, Google and Uber are now requiring workers to get vaccinated before coming to the office, and Twitter — also requiring vaccines — went so far as to shut down its reopened offices on Wednesday, and put future office reopenings on hold.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.

After a year and a half of living and working through a pandemic, it's no surprise that employees are sending out stress signals at record rates. According to a 2021 study by Indeed, 52% of employees today say they feel burnt out. Over half of employees report working longer hours, and a quarter say they're unable to unplug from work.

The continued swell of reported burnout is a concerning trend for employers everywhere. Not only does it harm mental health and well-being, but it can also impact absenteeism, employee retention and — between the drain on morale and high turnover — your company culture.

Crisis management is one thing, but how do you permanently lower the temperature so your teams can recover sustainably? Companies around the world are now taking larger steps to curb burnout, with industry leaders like LinkedIn, Hootsuite and Bumble shutting down their offices for a full week to allow all employees extra time off. The CEO of Okta, worried about burnout, asked all employees to email him their vacation plans in 2021.

Keep Reading Show less
Stella Garber
Stella Garber is Trello's Head of Marketing. Stella has led Marketing at Trello for the last seven years from early stage startup all the way through its acquisition by Atlassian in 2017 and beyond. Stella was an early champion of remote work, having led remote teams for the last decade plus.
Protocol | China

Livestreaming ecommerce next battleground for China’s nationalists

Vendors for Nike and even Chinese brands were harassed for not donating enough to Henan.

Nationalists were trolling in the comment sections of livestream sessions selling products by Li-Ning, Adidas and other brands.

Collage: Weibo, Bilibili

The No. 1 rule of sales: Don't praise your competitor's product. Rule No. 2: When you are put to a loyalty test by nationalist trolls, forget the first rule.

While China continues to respond to the catastrophic flooding that has killed 99 and displaced 1.4 million people in the central province of Henan, a large group of trolls was busy doing something else: harassing ordinary sportswear sellers on China's livestream ecommerce platforms. Why? Because they determined that the brands being sold had donated too little, or too late, to the people impacted by floods.

Keep Reading Show less
Zeyi Yang
Zeyi Yang is a reporter with Protocol | China. Previously, he worked as a reporting fellow for the digital magazine Rest of World, covering the intersection of technology and culture in China and neighboring countries. He has also contributed to the South China Morning Post, Nikkei Asia, Columbia Journalism Review, among other publications. In his spare time, Zeyi co-founded a Mandarin podcast that tells LGBTQ stories in China. He has been playing Pokemon for 14 years and has a weird favorite pick.
Power

The video game industry is bracing for its Netflix and Spotify moment

Subscription gaming promises to upend gaming. The jury's out on whether that's a good thing.

It's not clear what might fall through the cracks if most of the biggest game studios transition away from selling individual games and instead embrace a mix of free-to-play and subscription bundling.

Image: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Subscription services are coming for the game industry, and the shift could shake up the largest and most lucrative entertainment sector in the world. These services started as small, closed offerings typically available on only a handful of hardware platforms. Now, they're expanding to mobile phones and smart TVs, and promising to radically change the economics of how games are funded, developed and distributed.

Of the biggest companies in gaming today, Amazon, Apple, Electronic Arts, Google, Microsoft, Nintendo, Nvidia, Sony and Ubisoft all operate some form of game subscription. Far and away the most ambitious of them is Microsoft's Xbox Game Pass, featuring more than 100 games for $9.99 a month and including even brand-new titles the day they release. As of January, Game Pass had more than 18 million subscribers, and Microsoft's aggressive investment in a subscription future has become a catalyst for an industrywide reckoning on the likelihood and viability of such a model becoming standard.

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt
Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.
Protocol | Policy

Lina Khan wants to hear from you

The new FTC chair is trying to get herself, and the sometimes timid tech-regulating agency she oversees, up to speed while she still can.

Lina Khan is trying to push the FTC to corral tech companies

Photo: Graeme Jennings/AFP via Getty Images

"When you're in D.C., it's very easy to lose connection with the very real issues that people are facing," said Lina Khan, the FTC's new chair.

Khan made her debut as chair before the press on Wednesday, showing up to a media event carrying an old maroon book from the agency's library and calling herself a "huge nerd" on FTC history. She launched into explaining how much she enjoys the open commission meetings she's pioneered since taking over in June. That's especially true of the marathon public comment sessions that have wrapped up each of the two meetings so far.

Keep Reading Show less
Ben Brody

Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with.

Latest Stories