3 ms·
pretty juvenile IMO. great bridge burning though. nailed that part.
by rwebb 18y ago
pretty juvenile IMO. great bridge burning though. nailed that part.
- fallentimes 18y agoBut most of what he said was dead on. It just happened to be hilarious as well.
- rwebb 18y agomildly amusing, yes. dead on, no. like watching a train wreck in slow motion, yes.
- fallentimes 18y agoAre you trying to say Seesmic should have raised $50 million? :)
- rwebb 18y agonot at all
- raganwald 18y agoI give VCs and startup founders more credit than you do. If I met someone who blackballed Matt on the basis of a satire like this, I would wonder why they were being so insecure and/or vindictive. That being said, hang on a moment (waits 60s). Funny, no calls from VCs. I wonder if it was this: http://weblog.raganwald.com/2007/04/venture-capitalist-passes-away.html http://weblog.raganwald.com/2007/04/venture-capitalist-passe... Seriously, the people I know (probably many fewer than everyone else) are the types to laugh hardest at this stuff. I recall meeting with an investment banking boutique about writing valuation models for them. The partner told me that before getting to work I had to familiarize myself with the Code of Ethics for his profession. He handed me a heavy tome. I opened it, to find... blank pages! He laughed heartily. I can't see that guy spitting on Matt's shadow as they pass in the street.
- rwebb 18y agomatt's post pisses on people who hold a lot of clout within the industry in which he operates for no reason other than to get traffic to his blog. this seems shortsighted to me. maybe i'm wrong. let alone the fact that sequoia is the firm that put out the deck while kleiner is the only VC that has openly eschewed web 2.0 investments. they have been investing in energy and mobile while others put money into the seesmics. kleiner won't even listen to pitches from 99% of web companies even if they have a solid introduction. but matt decided to take a very public piss on them. it's a very small world. and the difference in tone within the comments on this thread vs. the "sequoia: armchair quarterbacks" is laughable.
- raganwald 18y agoLet's agree to disagree. You read a post where he pisses on people, I read a satire where he "takes the mick out of people." You perceive that his motivation is linkbaiting/trolling, it didn't occur to me to even consider his motivation one way or the other. I will say this, though: According to my personal values, if he is wronging people, it ought to be wrong regardless of whether he is wronging the rich and powerful or wronging the poor and helpless. Which is not to say that he wouldn't be burning bridges, but if I were to feel that he was wrong to publish this, I would feel that way on the basis of deciding that he was being mean or petty or spiteful or hurtful. I guess I just don't see the people he is satirizing as perceiving themselves as being hurt by this deck. It could be a question of timing: I might feel differently about the exact same post if it came at a time when VC's were laying analysts off and we were treated to pictures of employees carrying their personal effects to their cars.