3 ms·

I don't think VCs should be worried about Kickstarter, at least in the near future. A VC can see the long-term value of a business idea, whereas Kickstarter sup

I don't think VCs should be worried about Kickstarter, at least in the near future. A VC can see the long-term value of a business idea, whereas Kickstarter supporters are just excited to get their hands on a shiny new toy. I think it's a lot harder to get crowds of people excited enough about your unreleased social app to raise significant capital than it is for a handful of VCs, who will then have a vested interest in your subsequent success.

maratd 14y ago
> A VC can see the long-term value of a business idea > Kickstarter supporters are just excited to get their hands on a shiny new toy. Every kickstarter project I've supported is always about a product in the future. Including this one. Frequently, that shiny toy is years away. The only difference between kickstarter and a VC is that consumers are deciding if the company will eventually deliver a product they want. You just cut out the middleman. The VC.
- Florin_Andrei 14y ago
  So, the VCs, who often are funding disruptive technologies, are now facing the new kid on the block, pretty disruptive himself. Oh, the irony.
- randomdrake 14y ago
  >The only difference between kickstarter and a VC is that consumers are deciding if the company will eventually deliver a product they want. You just cut out the middleman. The VC. I don't know if that's necessarily true. The biggest difference is that VCs have an interest in the continued success in the company because they are looking for a return on their investment, not just the product in question.
liljimmytables 14y ago
I think the interesting thing is that you can now raise large sums while still having an exit condition that isn't "IPO" or "buyout." To me, anything that brings the focus of the CEO back to "create cool thing" is a good move for capitalism and the world in general.
- obtu 14y ago
  Technically, the only exit condition on Kickstarter is reaching the funding goal (often set much lower than the expected proceeds). After that, the cool thing may materialise with lesser coolness or not at all, and an ambitious project may find their next incentive in venture capital.
saturdaysaint 14y ago
I don't think VCs should be worried about Kickstarter, at least in the near future. A VC can see the long-term value of a business idea, whereas Kickstarter supporters are just excited to get their hands on a shiny new toy. A bright entrepreneur would have to be crazy not to ask themselves if they can come up with an interesting deliverable (ie shiny new toy) before they give up stake in their company. I don't think it's a stretch to imagine an alternate history where Instagram raised serious money by offering supporters bonus filters or where Zuckerberg came up with incentives to raise his first few million in the early days. "We want to bring Facebook to all the major midwest universities, but we need $200,000 to build x. We'll open it up to schools X Y and Z if we get to the next level! And you'll get a badge on your profile!"

I don't think VCs should be worried about Kickstarter, at least in the near future. A VC can see the long-term value of a business idea, whereas Kickstarter supporters are just excited to get their hands on a shiny new toy. I think it's a lot harder to get crowds of people excited enough about your unreleased social app to raise significant capital than it is for a handful of VCs, who will then have a vested interest in your subsequent success.

maratd 14y ago

> A VC can see the long-term value of a business idea > Kickstarter supporters are just excited to get their hands on a shiny new toy. Every kickstarter project I've supported is always about a product in the future. Including this one. Frequently, that shiny toy is years away. The only difference between kickstarter and a VC is that consumers are deciding if the company will eventually deliver a product they want. You just cut out the middleman. The VC.

Florin_Andrei 14y ago
So, the VCs, who often are funding disruptive technologies, are now facing the new kid on the block, pretty disruptive himself. Oh, the irony.
randomdrake 14y ago
>The only difference between kickstarter and a VC is that consumers are deciding if the company will eventually deliver a product they want. You just cut out the middleman. The VC. I don't know if that's necessarily true. The biggest difference is that VCs have an interest in the continued success in the company because they are looking for a return on their investment, not just the product in question.

liljimmytables 14y ago

I think the interesting thing is that you can now raise large sums while still having an exit condition that isn't "IPO" or "buyout." To me, anything that brings the focus of the CEO back to "create cool thing" is a good move for capitalism and the world in general.

obtu 14y ago
Technically, the only exit condition on Kickstarter is reaching the funding goal (often set much lower than the expected proceeds). After that, the cool thing may materialise with lesser coolness or not at all, and an ambitious project may find their next incentive in venture capital.

saturdaysaint 14y ago

I don't think VCs should be worried about Kickstarter, at least in the near future. A VC can see the long-term value of a business idea, whereas Kickstarter supporters are just excited to get their hands on a shiny new toy. A bright entrepreneur would have to be crazy not to ask themselves if they can come up with an interesting deliverable (ie shiny new toy) before they give up stake in their company. I don't think it's a stretch to imagine an alternate history where Instagram raised serious money by offering supporters bonus filters or where Zuckerberg came up with incentives to raise his first few million in the early days. "We want to bring Facebook to all the major midwest universities, but we need $200,000 to build x. We'll open it up to schools X Y and Z if we get to the next level! And you'll get a badge on your profile!"