3 ms·

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you seem to agree with me, with the exception of you thinking geography doesn't matter. I'd disagree with your idea that geogr

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you seem to agree with me, with the exception of you thinking geography doesn't matter. I'd disagree with your idea that geography doesn't matter. I would have more confidence in an ICO in the US than I would in say China where it can be hard to sue someone and collect your damages if you win. but if you really feel geography doesn't matter then please share your argument for this, I'm ready to learn!!

wslh 8y ago
> Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you seem to agree with me I am disagreeing and saying that it is VC/PE vs. Presales and ICO the whole story. > but if you really feel geography doesn't matter then please share your argument for this, I'm ready to learn!! It is not an argument, it is a fact. For example, you will see a really important investment to an Argentina based company (outside top geographies) in a few months.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > It is not an argument, it is a fact All capital flows have a home-country bias. Even securities which are easily bought and sold internationally [1]. Proximity to investors matters even within countries. A start-up raising VC or person promoting an ICO in Silicon Valley will raise more money faster than someone in Montana. They, in turn, will outperform someone in Zanzibar. Doesn't mean it can't be done from Montana or Zanzibar. Just that it's more difficult. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_home_bias_puzzle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_home_bias_puzzle
  - wslh 8y ago
    Beyond the obvious geography bias (in general, business networks are strongly connected within specific geographies) the crypto investments are notorious by crossing boundaries in a way not seen by the usual VCs. I mentioned one example before and I have more that will be disclosed to the public in the coming months. Again, I am not negating the bias towards proximity but seeing there is a new distinguishable phenomenon happening. This phenomenon favors global entrepreneurs in a new way.

wslh 8y ago

> Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you seem to agree with me I am disagreeing and saying that it is VC/PE vs. Presales and ICO the whole story. > but if you really feel geography doesn't matter then please share your argument for this, I'm ready to learn!! It is not an argument, it is a fact. For example, you will see a really important investment to an Argentina based company (outside top geographies) in a few months.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> It is not an argument, it is a fact All capital flows have a home-country bias. Even securities which are easily bought and sold internationally [1]. Proximity to investors matters even within countries. A start-up raising VC or person promoting an ICO in Silicon Valley will raise more money faster than someone in Montana. They, in turn, will outperform someone in Zanzibar. Doesn't mean it can't be done from Montana or Zanzibar. Just that it's more difficult. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_home_bias_puzzle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_home_bias_puzzle
- wslh 8y ago
  Beyond the obvious geography bias (in general, business networks are strongly connected within specific geographies) the crypto investments are notorious by crossing boundaries in a way not seen by the usual VCs. I mentioned one example before and I have more that will be disclosed to the public in the coming months. Again, I am not negating the bias towards proximity but seeing there is a new distinguishable phenomenon happening. This phenomenon favors global entrepreneurs in a new way.