5 ms·

> There is a small cadre of people who actually have what it takes to successfully build an NBT, and experienced investors are pretty good at recognizing them.

> There is a small cadre of people who actually have what it takes to successfully build an NBT, and experienced investors are pretty good at recognizing them. Because of this, they don't have trouble raising money. That's a pretty specious statement. I don't know how he came up with that; it certainly doesn't match with a lot of reality.

haburka 9y ago
Just because you have a different experience than the writer doesn't mean that either experience is invalid.
lisper 9y ago
> I don't know how he came up with that By looking at history. If you look lists of the most valuable startups the vast majority of them didn't have any trouble raising money. In fact, I can only think of a single recent (last 10 years) counterexample.
- burrows 9y ago
  Alternatively, this just shows that it's hard to build the NBT without funding.
  - lisper 9y ago
    The causality definitely runs both ways. If a company is perceived as an NBT, and that results in investors piling on, then the company is that much more likely to actually become an NBT. That's one of the reasons investors like to pile on: just because a prophecy is self-fulfilling doesn't make it any less accurate (just the opposite in fact).
    - burrows 9y ago
      What lesson should this teach founders; don't discount the importance of `looking like` the NBT?
      - david927 9y ago
        Or it could show how most investors are still very unsophisticated and insecure. They don't want it to be the NBT, they need for it to be. If the music industry was this bad, you would mainly be hearing variations of Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber on the radio. The lesson for founders, therefore, should be to avoid investors for as long as possible.
    - david927 9y ago
      You can't point to funding at a later stage (everyone sees that something's a hit a pile on) and work back to say that those were the only founders who could pull that off. You can't prove a negative. You're saying, "Only a few seeds 'have what it takes'. Experienced gardeners see that and so they give those seeds water."

haburka 9y ago

Just because you have a different experience than the writer doesn't mean that either experience is invalid.

lisper 9y ago

> I don't know how he came up with that By looking at history. If you look lists of the most valuable startups the vast majority of them didn't have any trouble raising money. In fact, I can only think of a single recent (last 10 years) counterexample.

burrows 9y ago
Alternatively, this just shows that it's hard to build the NBT without funding.
- lisper 9y ago
  The causality definitely runs both ways. If a company is perceived as an NBT, and that results in investors piling on, then the company is that much more likely to actually become an NBT. That's one of the reasons investors like to pile on: just because a prophecy is self-fulfilling doesn't make it any less accurate (just the opposite in fact).
  - burrows 9y ago
    What lesson should this teach founders; don't discount the importance of `looking like` the NBT?
    - david927 9y ago
      Or it could show how most investors are still very unsophisticated and insecure. They don't want it to be the NBT, they need for it to be. If the music industry was this bad, you would mainly be hearing variations of Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber on the radio. The lesson for founders, therefore, should be to avoid investors for as long as possible.
  - david927 9y ago
    You can't point to funding at a later stage (everyone sees that something's a hit a pile on) and work back to say that those were the only founders who could pull that off. You can't prove a negative. You're saying, "Only a few seeds 'have what it takes'. Experienced gardeners see that and so they give those seeds water."