6 ms·
Sequoia Productive Capital
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jger15 5y ago"That leaves the question of crypto..."
- capableweb 5y agoFull quote (+ bonus paragraph), since you somehow wanted to refer to something but exactly what is unclear, as you didn't actually write anything... > That leaves the question of crypto; given its oppositional nature to the current paradigm — decentralization, encryption, and ownership — it is clearly something completely new; moreover, the capital chasing returns in crypto is clearly financial capital, not production capital. > That suggests that crypto will continue to exist in a bit of a parallel universe, which makes sense; it already has its own currencies, after all. That is another way of saying I think that crypto is still very early in its lifecycle; 2017 wasn’t the big crash, nor will the next one be — remember that tech had its own internal boom-and-bust cycles in the three decades between the introduction of the Intel processor and the Dotcom bubble. Nor is this a bearish take: those three decades were exceptionally profitable for everyone involved — including Sequoia, which was founded in 1972. Perhaps its successor, the one that shifts to providing productive capital for crypto companies decades from now, has already been born.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- JohnJamesRambo 5y agoIs anyone else really disappointed where this era ended up? Mobile + cloud seems like darkest possible timeline you could tell me would exist when I was on my Commodore 64 dialing a BBS. I guess I didn’t understand the implications of everyone being connected and on at all times. It didn’t turn out as I planned. It all pretty much destroyed my family and friends.
- lotsofpulp 5y agoIt is not mobile + cloud that ended up here. It is lack of symmetric fiber to the home connections. People do not have upload capacity at home, so there is no choice but to depend on large cloud providers. If people had upload capacity, then it could have been possible to host your own backup solutions or media or personal websites.
- PragmaticPulp 5y agoI have symmetric gigabit fiber at home, a lot of experience managing tech and servers, and absolutely zero desire to host important things at my house. For less than $10/month I can get a cloud server plenty powerful for anything I want to host with power and bandwidth that are orders of magnitude more reliable than what I can get at my home. Plus I don't have to worry about floods, fires, or theft causing me to lose all of my data and backups stored at home.
- whoisthemachine 5y agoAgreed, and to add to your comment, the cost of securely hosting makes it not worthwhile to host at home.
- lotsofpulp 5y agoIf fiber to the home was widespread, then the market for people who might buy a self hosted solutions would be big enough to be addressable? Also, it is not an either or scenario. You can still backup to a different location in someone else’s computers. Fiber to the home just gives people the option to not solely depend on others’ computers.
- jasode 5y ago>If people had upload capacity, then it could have been possible to host your own backup solutions or media or personal websites. But a lot of us techies here have 1 Gbit dl+ul symmetric bandwidth and yet most of us would rather put source code on Github instead of self-hosting Gitlab at home. Why? Because most of us would rather do something else in our lives that's more high-priority than babysitting a git server (or self-hosted email server, or self-hosted NNTP USENET server instead of discussing stuff here on HN, etc). If (most) techies don't want to self-host, why would it be realistic to expect the mass population to self-host media or personal websites? There's another underlying reason other than upload bandwidth limitation.
- naveen99 5y agoprivate equity should get a boost if public companies are going to be forced mark to market for billionaires.
- villasv 5y agoTL;DR venture capital is becoming regular capital because tech companies keep growing fast well after the IPO; “the next big thing” is not coming on the short term, just more techy companies surfing VC money and more growth for tech companies; the current cycle is not yet ripe for disruption.
- echelon 5y agoBecause the current cycle's incumbents monopolize every tech market with value. FAAMG can staff up a team to clone your product if they think you're onto something.
- streetcat1 5y agoNo they cannot, look at snowflake for example, easily eating big query and red shift. Two things lack in FANNG: 1) Focus. 2) Politics.
- djyaz1200 5y agoThank you for the TL;DR
- orky56 5y agoThe traditional model of plant for 5 years and harvest for 5 years is dying/dead. Seed investments are getting larger and bleeding into Series A. Companies are staying private for longer. Liquidation events can be pushed further out without compromising growth. Sequoia Productive Capital makes the 10 year cycle less important. This allows Sequoia to focus on sourcing deals and reallocating capital accordingly to deliver results, which they have been consistent enough to keep acquiring capital from LPs. We are also seeing outsized returns on existing investments so sticking around for Series D/E/etc. and multiple years post-IPO might be key to get the 50-100+x returns.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jliptzin 5y agoOne of the most confusing charts I have ever seen
- alberth 5y agoOff topic: I know Ben Thompson commands a lot of respect, and I use to be a paid newsletter reader of his. But holy cow, can he use 8x more words to convey his thoughts than needed - and he can surely make something simple sound extremely complex. He raises good points but I really wish he would do some major editing and simplication in his posts.
- alphadog 5y agoThis is precisely the reason I am no longer a subscriber.
- ayewo 5y agoDid you switch to a competitor? If so, which one?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago> ...and he can surely make something simple sound extremely complex. Sadly, I think a lot of people producing content these days see this as a feature, not a bug. The more complex and/or sophisticated you make something sound, the more insightful it must be, and the more intelligent (and therefore valuable) you must be as a source of knowledge.
- ayewo 5y agoAlthough slightly off-topic, your points are totally valid. I remember reading something somewhere that said that even people whose job it is to digest large amounts of info daily would benefit from ideas expressed in a clear and direct way versus straight forward ideas that are made to appear complex. In other words, even highly sophisticated readers will be able to read your pieces faster and by extension, consume more of your material when you go the extra length to express your ideas in clear and familiar language. What do you now read in its place?
- caust1c 5y ago
- zelias 5y agoCan we just skip to the last season in which Zuck begins the final stage of his plan to unify all metaverse-enabled human conscioussness into the singularity?