4 ms·

It wasn't meant as a rant, more as a business opportunity. I agree that if you really want to get VC money you should do whatever it takes. I've done so myself

by mixmax 17y ago

It wasn't meant as a rant, more as a business opportunity. I agree that if you really want to get VC money you should do whatever it takes. I've done so myself with success (In Europe) and couldn't help to notice that the system is broken - say the right buzzwords, namedrop the right people and have a slick power point and your chances are good. It just seems like a bad decision businesswise for VC's to primarily invest in companies that are referred to them. They must miss some gems. There might be a startup hidden in there somewhere. Maybe you could charge to read through businessplans? Maybe you could crowdsource it?

rjurney 17y ago
I don't think there is a more effective vetting system than networking. If you haven't worked with someone, or with someone who has, up to some degree of separation, how can you really know if they're worth a crap?
- DanielBMarkham 17y ago
  Networking is a marketing and sales methodology, not a vetting methodology. It leads to groupthink, popularity contests, and running with the herd. Or put another way: if networking were the do-all, end-all, then how do so many technology teams do so well when assembled without using it? I agree with max -- there's a big business opportunity here. I know these criticisms sound like sour grapes. All I can say is that I know for a fact that putting together teams with great execution intelligence can happen in a lot of ways. Simply because it happens naturally in one way in the valley doesn't mean at all that's it's an optimum solution. EDIT: I don't want to come across as criticizing all things SV. There is a huge convenience factor when working near so many startups and Angel funds. I just also think that there are problems associated with the current setup there as well.
  - rjurney 17y ago
    Actually, it is a vetting methodology. You get recommended by someone that has worked with you, or that trusts someone that has worked with you, or who has seen fit to invest in your company. Its a chain of reputation. As to networking being the do-all, I think you'll find that most startups are a product of networking: its how teams form, its how they get funded, its how they grow. In fact: the network IS the wealth of an ecosystem. I'm not talking idle chit chat over martinis, I'm talking shipping and selling products. I'm not saying the system is perfect. I'm just saying it isn't irrational, it works the way it does for a reason, and it isn't very hard to participate if you're determined.
- qu1j0t3 17y ago
  That only covers half the argument ("I am in a better position to judge those opportunities referred to me"). You still have to acknowledge that there are good opportunities a VC can't/won't find through the network, or won't correctly evaluate. "That's life," though. :)
  - rjurney 17y ago
    There certainly are. I just think its the most effective method for VCs. Its probably not for seed stage investment - as Y Combinator has shown.

by mixmax 17y ago

rjurney 17y ago

I don't think there is a more effective vetting system than networking. If you haven't worked with someone, or with someone who has, up to some degree of separation, how can you really know if they're worth a crap?

DanielBMarkham 17y ago
Networking is a marketing and sales methodology, not a vetting methodology. It leads to groupthink, popularity contests, and running with the herd. Or put another way: if networking were the do-all, end-all, then how do so many technology teams do so well when assembled without using it? I agree with max -- there's a big business opportunity here. I know these criticisms sound like sour grapes. All I can say is that I know for a fact that putting together teams with great execution intelligence can happen in a lot of ways. Simply because it happens naturally in one way in the valley doesn't mean at all that's it's an optimum solution. EDIT: I don't want to come across as criticizing all things SV. There is a huge convenience factor when working near so many startups and Angel funds. I just also think that there are problems associated with the current setup there as well.
- rjurney 17y ago
  Actually, it is a vetting methodology. You get recommended by someone that has worked with you, or that trusts someone that has worked with you, or who has seen fit to invest in your company. Its a chain of reputation. As to networking being the do-all, I think you'll find that most startups are a product of networking: its how teams form, its how they get funded, its how they grow. In fact: the network IS the wealth of an ecosystem. I'm not talking idle chit chat over martinis, I'm talking shipping and selling products. I'm not saying the system is perfect. I'm just saying it isn't irrational, it works the way it does for a reason, and it isn't very hard to participate if you're determined.
qu1j0t3 17y ago
That only covers half the argument ("I am in a better position to judge those opportunities referred to me"). You still have to acknowledge that there are good opportunities a VC can't/won't find through the network, or won't correctly evaluate. "That's life," though. :)
- rjurney 17y ago
  There certainly are. I just think its the most effective method for VCs. Its probably not for seed stage investment - as Y Combinator has shown.