7 ms·

And as I've said before, if you're going to say something nasty, you'd better be right. Practically all the most successful tech companies have raised outside

by pg 15y ago

And as I've said before, if you're going to say something nasty, you'd better be right. Practically all the most successful tech companies have raised outside funding. If raising money is a sign of lameness, then for some strange reason the most successful startups all seem to be the lame ones. Honestly, you should be ashamed of yourself. The Songkicks have worked hard. This is a big milestone for them. And you are pissing all over it without knowing anything about them, just because this news happened to trip some idee fixe you're in the grip of.

jpdoctor 15y ago
> you'd better be right Did I get wrong 1. hit rate, 2. negative IRRs or 3. the take? > Practically all But not all.
- pg 15y ago
  I don't know Sequoia's hit rate (and I doubt you do either) but you got 2 and 3 wrong, yes. Practically all is enough to falsify your claim.
  - jpdoctor 15y ago
    Re 1: You have not heard that saying from Sequoia? Re 2: Linked elsewhere, but again here wrt negative IRRs http://www.matrixpartners.com/site/press_detail/63/ http://www.matrixpartners.com/site/press_detail/63/ And the lawsuit ISTR that resulted from that article: http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/9917 http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/9917 Re 3: Please let us know the carry and take numbers.
    - pg 15y ago
      The first article doesn't talk about the final returns from any Sequoia fund but merely points out one was down halfway through its 10 year life. The second does talk about final returns and says "UC investments in partnerships managed by Sequoia Capital (Funds III to X) have returned over $508 million on an investment of about $110 million for a 4.6-fold return."
      - jpdoctor 15y ago
        Yes the second article is about the appeal. UCal did not wish to be kicked out of Sequoia funds so they played up the internet bubble funds to present to the judge. It was the disclosure on negative IRRs that led to the first article that got them disinvited from Sequoia iirc. UC was just obeying disclosure laws. Do you remember differently? Of course, VCs could just release their performance history numbers so that investors and prospective entrepreneurs know what the percentages are. Who does it serve that they don't release these numbers?

by pg 15y ago

jpdoctor 15y ago

> you'd better be right Did I get wrong 1. hit rate, 2. negative IRRs or 3. the take? > Practically all But not all.

pg 15y ago
I don't know Sequoia's hit rate (and I doubt you do either) but you got 2 and 3 wrong, yes. Practically all is enough to falsify your claim.
- jpdoctor 15y ago
  Re 1: You have not heard that saying from Sequoia? Re 2: Linked elsewhere, but again here wrt negative IRRs http://www.matrixpartners.com/site/press_detail/63/ http://www.matrixpartners.com/site/press_detail/63/ And the lawsuit ISTR that resulted from that article: http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/9917 http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/9917 Re 3: Please let us know the carry and take numbers.
  - pg 15y ago
    The first article doesn't talk about the final returns from any Sequoia fund but merely points out one was down halfway through its 10 year life. The second does talk about final returns and says "UC investments in partnerships managed by Sequoia Capital (Funds III to X) have returned over $508 million on an investment of about $110 million for a 4.6-fold return."
    - jpdoctor 15y ago
      Yes the second article is about the appeal. UCal did not wish to be kicked out of Sequoia funds so they played up the internet bubble funds to present to the judge. It was the disclosure on negative IRRs that led to the first article that got them disinvited from Sequoia iirc. UC was just obeying disclosure laws. Do you remember differently? Of course, VCs could just release their performance history numbers so that investors and prospective entrepreneurs know what the percentages are. Who does it serve that they don't release these numbers?