I have to disagree. Although I acknowledge there are distinctions between the two, I can't help but see the parallels. A VC is more like a partner that brings

I have to disagree. Although I acknowledge there are distinctions between the two, I can't help but see the parallels. A VC is more like a partner that brings money to the table, and possibly contacts and advice and they don't take the largest cut by default. You don't think a label brings those kind of perks too? I think an artist would much rather have Rick Rubin produce their album than some schmuck with a sound board. Your negotiation position with a VC is much stronger than a typical no-name artist that wants to get distribution. Just like I, a no-name business student, don't expect to be funded by Sequoia anytime soon, nor should a no-name artist expect to be signed to EMI. It takes traction to gain the attention of either. Like I said though, I do agree with you on several points. Artists getting shafted and the record companies control of distribution are key points of differentiation between VCs and labels.