3 ms·
The most frustrating part of this whole situation is that this is going to cause VC deal flow to be impacted for those entrepreneurs who actually know what they
by josh_carterPDX 10y ago
The most frustrating part of this whole situation is that this is going to cause VC deal flow to be impacted for those entrepreneurs who actually know what they're doing.
- gumby 10y agoUnlikely -- this deal didn't really get any VC deal flow. DFJ invested because Draper's kids were childhood friends of Holmes'. Ellison (not a VC) invested because his investment manager was a college friend of her father's. ATV invested because, well who knows -- perhaps because DFJ invested. Those are the three investors. No life science VCs invested.
- josh_carterPDX 10y agoI guess I was speaking more broadly. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, but my hunch is that there are more elements at play such as the economy that is slowing early stage deal flow. But this whole situation sure is making it easy for someone investing in a company to spend more time scrutinizing the team and company. Again, may not be a bad thing. Time will tell.
- ben_jones 10y agoI'm a really uninformed opinion but doesn't public perception impact VC at some level, even subliminally? If public perception goes to shit, might the market (and VC) follow?
- gumby 10y agoLife science investors need to invest in life science deals -- it's the promise they made to their customers (err...LPs) and what the need to do to make any more than the management fee. If anything, they can tout their prowess in passing on the Theranos shitshow. As far as I can tell right now life science investing is doing fine. I am advising one company (and in the device diagnostic space, same space, if different application than Theranos) which is deciding over multiple offers.