Comments on: On Venture Capital

By: Anne 2.0 » Why Venture Capitalists Are Doomed

Anne 2.0 » Why Venture Capitalists Are Doomed — Mon, 15 May 2006 21:08:15 +0000

[...] Dave Winer offers his suggestions for reforming the VC industry. Mathew Ingram disagrees with Dave and says “venture capital didn’t create the bubble.” Other opinions from the bloke-o-sphere can be found here, here, here and… oh, why don’t you just go look on tech.memeorandum for the latest. [...]

By: Paul Stratman

Paul Stratman — Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:20:50 +0000

I know nothing’s free. I have my own accounting degree from the State of Ohio. Excuse me. Now
that I’m retired, I need to drive my own semi-road-tractor.

What fun…….but no venture investors. Why??

By: Hans

Hans — Sun, 05 Feb 2006 07:01:56 +0000

I would take money from a VC before I’d take money from Winer’s “users” any day. It’s not about their money. It’s about their network and their expertise.

By: Ingenuity » Curious Office

Ingenuity » Curious Office — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 03:16:24 +0000

[...] As both Paul Graham and Michael Arrington have pointed out, large VC funds are overvaluing many of the new web startups, purely because of the size of the fund. Here’s Mike’s take: So what do I think is wrong with funds today? Many of them are too big. They need to make big investments to justify fund size and the associated management fees. But companies can create a lot with much less in the way of resources compared to a few years ago. They donâ€™t need as much money. But they take it anywayâ€¦and this may be a reason that valuations have risen. [...]

By: Thatedeguy : The future of VC?

Thatedeguy : The future of VC? — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 16:52:16 +0000

[...] Over the weekend, a discussion blossomed(thanks to Dave Winer) about the future of Venture Capital. Then everybody else jumped on board. Scoble, Doc, Ensight, CrunchNotes and Nolan just to name a few. [...]

By: Life With Alacrity

Life With Alacrity — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 02:18:15 +0000

On Being an Angel

This week has also seen a new topic enter the blog zeitgeist: the topic of reforming or reinventing venture capital. All types of venture investment — seed, angel, venture, and institutional alike — carry with it great risks and great rewards. But be…

By: Dion Almaer

Dion Almaer — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 01:37:29 +0000

I love how some people laugh at the VCs that took online pet companies public.

The laugh though isn’t on the VC’s but rather the retail investors. The VC’s WON. They got IPOs and mergers and such for crappy companies. They got their pay off.

Dion Almaer
http://ajaxian.com

By: Ookles Blog » VC 2.01 and other thefts

Ookles Blog » VC 2.01 and other thefts — Tue, 31 Jan 2006 04:36:59 +0000

[...] Crunchnotes (Michael Arrington) has a workmanlike summary of the argument, as does Imajes (James Cox), from whom I confess to stealing “VC 2.01.” In recompense, I’ll let him have the last word, on blogs-are-my-rolodex: [...]

By: Sproutit.com. Â» Five Reasons Why VCs Still Work

Sproutit.com. Â» Five Reasons Why VCs Still Work — Mon, 30 Jan 2006 14:17:03 +0000

[...] Some respected people (see here and here) seem to think its time for a new model of funding. … Unfortunately, this proposal ignores some basic realities about business and funding. Here are my top five reasons why the current VC model still works [...]

By: Wehr I Am » Blog Archive » Winer forgets Graham

Wehr I Am » Blog Archive » Winer forgets Graham — Mon, 30 Jan 2006 02:49:04 +0000

[...] Michael Arrington did a nice job summarizing Dave’s main points: 1. “venture capital is broken because they are middlemen and they make bad decisions (lots of online pet companies in the nineties)” 2. “and people really need less capital now to start companies, and they need it later in the cycle” 2. “so companies should go right to the users, who often have money” 3. “but Dave ends his essay by saying that some companies will still need capital, and suggests forming a publicly held venture fund to supply this capital” [...]