Power

Unity’s unusual IPO was a huge success, raising more than $1.3 billion

"The perception is that [Epic Games is] a bigger competitor than they are," says CFO Kim Jabal.

Unity’s unusual IPO was a huge success, raising more than $1.3 billion

The company allowed employees to sell 15% of their holdings on day one, a big departure from the usual six-month lockup period.

Image: Unity

In a busy week for IPOs, game-engine maker Unity brought the week to a close. It listed on Friday morning, with shares immediately surging more than 30% from its IPO price. That values the company at nearly $20 billion, overtaking rival Epic Games' most recent private valuation of $17.3 billion.

Unity raised more than $1.3 billion in the IPO, which may come in useful given the company's lofty ambitions. Unity started out as a tool to allow game developers to quickly and easily launch games, benefiting in particular from the smartphone boom. "We democratized game development," CFO Kim Jabal told Protocol.

But it's now got its sights set on the rest of the world. Unity's tech is already used by architects, film studios and car designers, who use the software to model projects before they're built. In its S-1 filing, the company estimated that there was a $17 billion market opportunity for its solutions beyond the gaming industry. Jabal said it was a challenge deciding which vertical to focus on, but said a lot of development can help strengthen most businesses: "Fundamentally, the core investments we're making to make the product better apply both to gaming and other industries."

Based on the warm reception to its listing, investors seem to think Unity can pull that off. But the stock's pop, though large, was smaller than other tech companies' in recent weeks. That might be more reflective of Unity's unusual IPO process than tepid demand, though. Unlike a typical IPO, where bankers chat to investors to try to gauge demand and set a price based on that, Unity "asked investors to give us their interest at different prices in different quantities specifically," Jabal said.

The team then looked at those bids to decide how to price the offering. "We wanted [the process] to be data oriented," Jabal said, adding that "we had 100% visibility into the demand curve." She declined to say whether part of the reason for choosing this method was to avoid a massive pop, instead saying, "I will just reiterate that we were looking for the best outcome from a financial perspective … so you can, I guess, draw your own conclusions."

The process was similar to Google's "dutch auction" back in 2004 — indeed, Jabal worked at Google at the time, and Lise Buyer, who helped architect that listing, advised Unity. But there were some differences: Google's process was more automated than Unity's, where the ultimate price was handpicked. (Though some reports say the same happened at Google, when investors threatened to drop out at the last minute.) "We felt that this was sort of a balance," Jabal said. "It's not so scientific and perfect down to the, you know, totally machine based; we wanted to have some discretion."

It's not the only way Unity's IPO differed from most. The company allowed employees to sell 15% of their holdings on day one, a big departure from the usual six-month lockup period.

Whether those employees win out in the long term now depends on whether Unity can overcome the significant challenges ahead. In its S-1, it highlighted the effect privacy regulation could have on its ad business, along with the impact of Apple's move to kill IDFA. That plays into a broader challenge: Unity is very reliant on maintaining access to Apple and Google's platforms, and as Epic Games' fight with Apple shows, that access is not guaranteed.

Still, Epic's woes could help Unity, if developers decide that using Epic's Unreal products are no longer worth the risk. Jabal downplayed the competition from Epic, though, saying "I think the perception is that they're a bigger competitor than they are." Epic, she said, has "a different focus. They're focused on the metaverse, we're focused on tools for creators." Unity's biggest competitors, Jabal thinks, are companies that build their own engines and services, and Cocos, which is particularly popular in China.

Whatever the long-term outcome, some early investors will be particularly pleased today. Sequoia stood to make the most from the listing, with its 24.1% stake in Unity now worth around $5 billion, while Silver Lake owns 18.2%. Plenty of justification for them to kick back with some games for the weekend, then.

Climate

This carbon capture startup wants to clean up the worst polluters

The founder and CEO of point-source carbon capture company Carbon Clean discusses what the startup has learned, the future of carbon capture technology, as well as the role of companies like his in battling the climate crisis.

Carbon Clean CEO Aniruddha Sharma told Protocol that fossil fuels are necessary, at least in the near term, to lift the living standards of those who don’t have access to cars and electricity.

Photo: Carbon Clean

Carbon capture and storage has taken on increasing importance as companies with stubborn emissions look for new ways to meet their net zero goals. For hard-to-abate industries like cement and steel production, it’s one of the few options that exist to help them get there.

Yet it’s proven incredibly challenging to scale the technology, which captures carbon pollution at the source. U.K.-based company Carbon Clean is leading the charge to bring down costs. This year, it raised a $150 million series C round, which the startup said is the largest-ever funding round for a point-source carbon capture company.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol covering climate. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at mma@protocol.com.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Workplace

Why companies cut staff after raising millions

Are tech firms blowing millions in funding just weeks after getting it? Experts say it's more complicated than that.

Bolt, Trade Republic, HomeLight, and Stord all drew attention from funding announcements that happened just weeks or days before layoffs.

Photo: Pulp Photography/Getty Images

Fintech startup Bolt was one of the first tech companies to slash jobs, cutting 250 employees, or a third of its staff, in May. For some workers, the pain of layoffs was a shock not only because they were the first, but also because the cuts came just four months after Bolt had announced a $355 million series E funding round and achieved a peak valuation of $11 billion.

“Bolt employees were blind sided because the CEO was saying just weeks ago how everything is fine,” an anonymous user wrote on the message board Blind. “It has been an extremely rough day for 1/3 of Bolt employees,” another user posted. “Sadly, I was one of them who was let go after getting a pay-raise just a couple of weeks ago.”

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.

Climate

The fight to define the carbon offset market's future

The world’s largest carbon offset issuer is fighting a voluntary effort to standardize the industry. And the fate of the climate could hang in the balance.

It has become increasingly clear that scaling the credit market will first require clear standards and transparency.

Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

There’s a major fight brewing over what kind of standards will govern the carbon offset market.

A group of independent experts looking to clean up the market’s checkered record and the biggest carbon credit issuer on the voluntary market is trying to influence efforts to define what counts as a quality credit. The outcome could make or break an industry increasingly central to tech companies meeting their net zero goals.

Keep Reading Show less
Lisa Martine Jenkins

Lisa Martine Jenkins is a senior reporter at Protocol covering climate. Lisa previously wrote for Morning Consult, Chemical Watch and the Associated Press. Lisa is currently based in Brooklyn, and is originally from the Bay Area. Find her on Twitter ( @l_m_j_) or reach out via email (ljenkins@protocol.com).

Policy

White House AI Bill of Rights lacks specific guidance for AI rules

The document unveiled today by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is long on tech guidance, but short on restrictions for AI.

While the document provides extensive suggestions for how to incorporate AI rights in technical design, it does not include any recommendations for restrictions on the use of controversial forms of AI.

Photo: Ana Lanza/Unsplash

It was a year in the making, but people eagerly anticipating the White House Bill of Rights for AI will have to continue waiting for concrete recommendations for future AI policy or restrictions.

Instead, the document unveiled today by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is legally non-binding and intended to be used as a handbook and a “guide for society” that could someday inform government AI legislation or regulations.

Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights features a list of five guidelines for protecting people in relation to AI use:

Keep Reading Show less
Kate Kaye

Kate Kaye is an award-winning multimedia reporter digging deep and telling print, digital and audio stories. She covers AI and data for Protocol. Her reporting on AI and tech ethics issues has been published in OneZero, Fast Company, MIT Technology Review, CityLab, Ad Age and Digiday and heard on NPR. Kate is the creator of RedTailMedia.org and is the author of "Campaign '08: A Turning Point for Digital Media," a book about how the 2008 presidential campaigns used digital media and data.

Latest Stories
Bulletins