3 ms·
I'd be interested to see numbers. But I feel like the numbers used to be roughly 50% of investments were wipe-outs. 40% brought back the 1-2x returns, and 10%
by AlexMuir 14y ago
I'd be interested to see numbers. But I feel like the numbers used to be roughly 50% of investments were wipe-outs. 40% brought back the 1-2x returns, and 10% delivered a 5x. Ie. 1 in 10 investments was responsible for the profits. Now with talent acquisitions there is a safety margin for the 50% which previously returned nothing.
So if those numbers still hold true then the bulk of a VC's portfolio (by investments, not dollars) is boosted by the availability of talent acquisitions.
- tptacek 14y agoHere's an earlier 'pg post which doesn't really rebut either of us, but does suggest that earlier VC don't like talent acquisitions: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3548359 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3548359
- DanielRibeiro 14y agoAlso, Dan Shapiro did some of the math on his "VC Insanity, explained"[1]. On a side note, Fred Wilson has responded to this thread below[2,3,4,5]. [1] http://www.danshapiro.com/blog/2010/08/vc-insanity-economics/ http://www.danshapiro.com/blog/2010/08/vc-insanity-economics... [2] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4828933 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4828933 [3] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4828936 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4828936 [4] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4828943 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4828943 [5] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4829128 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4829128