We are doing many of these rounds as inside rounds, meaning the existing investors are funding the company without a new lead investor. I see this as a big oppo

We are doing many of these rounds as inside rounds, meaning the existing investors are funding the company without a new lead investor. I see this as a big opportunity for our firm and I am excited about it and entusiastic about making these investments. What I don't see is a lot of firms interested in leading these messy middle stage rounds as a new lead investor. I'd like to see more deal flow from other VCs at this stage because I think this is where you want to be in the VC busines right now. I think you want to invest in the mess. Hrmm, so which is it? The blog seems to have some really mixed messages. If you're excited and enthusiastic about keeping portfolio companies close then why would you want more outside led rounds? Just for the validation? It is hard to not read this as a plea for more risk sharing in ongoing financing so that they can allocate more money elsewhere - like the overly frothy early stage market the reader is instructed to avoid.