4 ms·
Investors don't value their money, obviously. They just hope to hand over the hot potato and make a profit. And they don't even run on Android or the web.
by nikolay 6y ago
Investors don't value their money, obviously. They just hope to hand over the hot potato and make a profit. And they don't even run on Android or the web.
- PostThisTooFast 6y agoThe bubble is back. People never learn.
- danielmarkbruce 6y agoThe folks at a16z, dst and tiger are very savvy, and there is nothing to suggest they don't value money.
- plumeria 6y agoOne must be cautious with authority bias though.
- villasv 6y agoParent commenter didn't say that a16z should be blindly trusted, just stated the obvious counterpoint that they're not ignorant as implied.
- loceng 6y agoAgreed - and it's LP money anyhow, a cut they take regardless of long-term success. If you can boost a brand to enough mind share, even if it costs you billions, then you have these golden eggs - even if they're hollow golden eggs - to show LPs what you're capable of; even though arguably a waste of money, it doesn't bother me if the LPs aren't large funds of the general population, the idea of such waste bothers me when it's people's investments that they're expecting or hoping to retire off of - there is such a delay and disconnect/misalignment between financial incentives though that the finance industrial complex has been able to get away with.
- danielmarkbruce 6y agoThese are pretty vague and generic statements. None of those firms just arrived on the scenes. They all have long track records of delivering real value for their investors. By and large, the big pension funds aren't silly. They understand incentives aren't perfectly aligned. It doesn't mean people can't behave well and manage them.
- nikolay 6y agoMaybe they hope for an acquisition, but given Facebook has Hotline, I'm not sure if they plan will materialize.
- danielmarkbruce 6y agoIs it that hard to believe that they think there is a reasonable chance this ends up a giant, profitable business? Many things (twitter, airbnb are classic examples) looked trivial and stupid to many people (including me) at the outset. Jack Dorsey is a billionaire. So are the AirBnb guys. Chase Coleman is too. Andreessen and Horowitz. Uri Milner. These aren't dumb guys, and they aren't desperate.
- nikolay 6y agoSo, Jack Dorsey is an authority? Thanks to him Twitter is such a stinky pile! And the greed-obsessed Square is getting killed by Clover.
- danielmarkbruce 6y agoHe isn't - but Twitter is a $50 bill mkt cap company and Square is $100 bill. The point is, when smart investors invest in something which appears stupid, there is a decent chance it isn't stupid at all, that it just requires a different viewpoint. Or something. Anyone around long enough for the start of twitter and airbnb can tell you how stupid they seemed to a lot of people (myself included). They weren't stupid, we were.
- nikolay 6y agoBeing a billionaire is more luck than skills. Also, not all people care about money. For example, I'm never been attracted to money, power, and fame, so, am I a loser as I work on nonprofit stuff? It is very simple - yes, Clubhouse got some traction due to the pandemic and people lacking social interactions and given how many Zoom calls end up being audio only, made sense. But Clubhouse is not something that will be attractive after the end of the pandemic. Also, the idea is so simple, and it's not even fully flushed out to be meaningful, and there are better clones already. The inertia helps, true, but do you guys remember the fate of Path.com? Because I do. I think Clubhouse will follow its fate, too.