4 ms·

Has FundersClub actually disrupted venture capital? Is this a claim that they intend to do so? Do they know what "disruption" actually means? I find the number

by kenko 13y ago

Has FundersClub actually disrupted venture capital? Is this a claim that they intend to do so? Do they know what "disruption" actually means? I find the number of articles/shoddily rewritten press releases that claim that Startup X "is disrupting" something, when Startup X barely exists, extremely amusing.

wavefunction 13y ago
"disrupting" is some marketing bullshit. When I hear someone mention that word... I'm far more interested in "remaking" and "reforming" which imply some sort of constructive outcome rather than just fucking shit up.
- kenko 13y ago
  Well, once upon a time, "disruption" had a real meaning. "Disruptive innovation" as a contrast with "sustaining innovation" that makes an existing thing better. Corollary (quoted from elsewhere): "If the established players in the industry are trying to smack your new model down, that's a sign that your innovation isn't disruptive -- it means its utility is oriented similarly to theirs, so they could in principle adopt whatever use it has. The canonical example is steel micro-mills ... They started off being only good enough for low-margin, cruddy steel like rebar, business which the real steel mills was delighted not to have to deal with any more. Only the micro-mills got better and better and kept taking the lowest-margin business away from the mills until most of them couldn't function any more." (Related corollary, disruption = innovation through inferiority: http://www.mrteacup.org/post/startups-innovation-through-inferiority.html http://www.mrteacup.org/post/startups-innovation-through-inf...) Of course somewhere along the line someone decided that disruption = the new hotness, so now no matter what you do, even if it's something that's been done forever (e.g. renting clothes out short-term), you have to call it "disruptive".
cwilson 13y ago
Note that the headline of the Venturebeat article itself doesn't use the word disrupt.
alxbrun 13y ago
+1 And you aint going to disrupt anything by investing "$5 million in 25 companies".

by kenko 13y ago

wavefunction 13y ago

"disrupting" is some marketing bullshit. When I hear someone mention that word... I'm far more interested in "remaking" and "reforming" which imply some sort of constructive outcome rather than just fucking shit up.

kenko 13y ago
Well, once upon a time, "disruption" had a real meaning. "Disruptive innovation" as a contrast with "sustaining innovation" that makes an existing thing better. Corollary (quoted from elsewhere): "If the established players in the industry are trying to smack your new model down, that's a sign that your innovation isn't disruptive -- it means its utility is oriented similarly to theirs, so they could in principle adopt whatever use it has. The canonical example is steel micro-mills ... They started off being only good enough for low-margin, cruddy steel like rebar, business which the real steel mills was delighted not to have to deal with any more. Only the micro-mills got better and better and kept taking the lowest-margin business away from the mills until most of them couldn't function any more." (Related corollary, disruption = innovation through inferiority: http://www.mrteacup.org/post/startups-innovation-through-inferiority.html http://www.mrteacup.org/post/startups-innovation-through-inf...) Of course somewhere along the line someone decided that disruption = the new hotness, so now no matter what you do, even if it's something that's been done forever (e.g. renting clothes out short-term), you have to call it "disruptive".

cwilson 13y ago

Note that the headline of the Venturebeat article itself doesn't use the word disrupt.

alxbrun 13y ago

+1 And you aint going to disrupt anything by investing "$5 million in 25 companies".