4 ms·
-Thank- you. I scrolled through all the replies until I saw this one, because it seemed like such an obvious reason for why there would be a correlation. The fi
by lostcolony 5y ago
-Thank- you. I scrolled through all the replies until I saw this one, because it seemed like such an obvious reason for why there would be a correlation. The first is "someone had an idea", and the latter is "someone had an idea that outsiders vetted and decided to put money towards". Of course the latter would be more likely to succeed. That doesn't mean the latter would not have succeeded had they foregone investing, nor that the former would have succeeded had they only been able to raise funds.
- ilrwbwrkhv 5y agoEhh. If you look at the VC world, it is hard for the VCs to bet right. Which means it is essentially just a gamble.
- lostcolony 5y agoSo you're saying you disagree with the parent that started this thread, that there isn't even a correlation. I'm not saying I agree, just that even if there is such a correlation it does not imply causation, for a -very- obvious reason.
- 41209 5y agoThey still gamble intelligently. Would you give some random programer 10 million ? Every one of us could probably create a website, but only a select few could create a business ready to receive funding.