4 ms·
It's not just about viability, it's about complexity and timeline. There's very little appetite for projects with a 30+ year timeline among private investment.
by jasonwatkinspdx 7y ago
It's not just about viability, it's about complexity and timeline. There's very little appetite for projects with a 30+ year timeline among private investment. You can't expect VC backing for stuff like ITER.
- tompccs 7y agoWhat technologies can you think of which didn't have profitable waypoints? - Internet - packet-switching routers for LANs - Microchips - ballistic missile guidance - Nuclear - radioactive tracers, radiotherapy, watch faces, ... - Microbiology - vaccines, insulin, ... Who on earth is making money out of controlled nuclear fusion? Where are the waypoints? Where can we make something useful in the short to medium time horizon? I also dispute your point of "little appetite for....30+ year timeline" projects, as the MEMS industry has routinely funded 30 year development cycles before technology maturation. The difference is, as I said, there are usually useful waypoints before the technology has fully matured.
- perl4ever 7y agoThat's an odd thing to say. Ever hear of a thing called 30 year bonds?
- jasonwatkinspdx 7y agoBond's ain't VC.