4 ms·
It's strange to me that most of the talk around Color is focused around the founders and not the investors. The investors are a much more interesting subject. I
by bradly 14y ago
It's strange to me that most of the talk around Color is focused around the founders and not the investors. The investors are a much more interesting subject. I mean, there are always going to be people willing to accept 40 million without a real product, heck I'm probably one of them, but I'd like to see interviews with the people who thought it was a good idea to give a company at that stage much money. I'm much more interested in hearing from them.
- smacktoward 14y agoThat would be interesting, but I doubt it will ever happen. Nobody with any interest in participating in the VC-funded ecosystem (which includes much of the tech media, sadly) is ever going to point at one of the investors who fund that ecosystem and publicly call them out as a sucker. Even if they, you know, are a sucker.
- MatthewPhillips 14y agoYou say that now with the hindsight of LinkedIn's IPO, Facebook's post-IPO struggles, Twitter's struggling to monetize, but in the time period when Color was raising funds was late 2010 / early 2011 when we were at the height of the social mobile apps bubble.
- anjc 14y agoI'd guess that the risk of losing 40 million was worth it, in this case. And that's probably not a lot of money to stump up, for some people/groups.