4 ms·
It must be extremely frustrating for the VC firms to be cut out of the "next Whatsapp" entirely. In the unlikely event that Telegram prevails, it's not entirely
by m0zg 7y ago
It must be extremely frustrating for the VC firms to be cut out of the "next Whatsapp" entirely. In the unlikely event that Telegram prevails, it's not entirely clear why venture investment would even be needed in a lot of cases. The "network" would still be valuable, but I think it can be purchased for a lot less.
I'd much prefer a 100% transparent, cryptographically verifiable ownership contract to an impenetrable maze of the usual one sided legalese you will find in equity contracts.
I'm not a VC, though. I'm sure VCs would much prefer the opposite: for things to remain just as they are now. Regulatory capture is a powerful thing.
- wmf 7y agoWeren't most of the buyers of the TON/Gram pre-ICO VCs? They're not cut out at all. More generally, there's no reason why entrepreneurs would refuse investment from good VCs. I can imagine scammers would want to lock out VCs to avoid scrutiny, but real businesses shouldn't.
- m0zg 7y agoVCs don't just buy small chunks of companies. They normally also buy influence and (often) preferential treatment, which they don't get if they just buy into an ICO.