5 ms·

Okay, so they charge to attend a conference. Maybe the money isn't worth it. I don't see any mention of people having actually gone there, nor if the conference

by larrik 13y ago

Okay, so they charge to attend a conference. Maybe the money isn't worth it. I don't see any mention of people having actually gone there, nor if the conference is actually a good thing. Not recognizing the VCs from an east coast conference is hardly an automatic fail, in my mind. There's no shortage of financial companies here, after all. A "scam" would mean that the people paying don't get what they were promised. This article doesn't claim that at all. It's just a bunch of people who think the price is too high. YMV might be terrible, but this article is hardly convincing.

tptacek 13y ago
Charging un-funded startups to attend a conference to matchmake them with VC's is unproductive and unethical. If there's a problem with this article, it's that it takes hundreds of words trying to unspool drama from such a simple point.
- larrys 13y ago
  "Charging un-funded startups to attend a conference to matchmake them with VC's is unproductive and unethical." 100% don't agree. [1] Unproductive for the startup? Making contacts and getting some exposure and having discussions (and most importantly making mistakes) is unproductive? How so? Charging? As the retort from the principal of the firm said what are they supposed to do do this for free? And exactly what is unethical? Taking advantage of young people who don't know the difference between what you (or others here) might consider a "legit" opportunity (hey like spending half their life trying to get into the YC or VC lottery to begin with) and this? [1] When I graduated from college on my own dime I paid money to fly to (get this) a "word processing conference" in order to make contacts and establish myself in what (I thought) would be the new business I was starting (computer supplies). Later when starting other businesses I flew to other places to go to expos, shows, whatever I needed to do. I used my own money to do that (that I had earned).
  - tptacek 13y ago
    What's a well-known startup that was funded as a result of having paid to meet investors? If you can't name one, the unproductiveness argument is straightforward, and the ethical argument follows from it. The reality is that this simply isn't how venture funding works. Founders don't pay to meet investors; they exercise their own networks to get intros. Paying to expand your network in some obvious was is unhelpful; all it does is send a signal that you don't have a real network.
    - larrys 13y ago
      "What's a well-known startup that was funded as a result of having paid to meet investors?" The answer to that question isn't known to me. Of course if I was the one that was producing the event, and someone asked that question, it would be valid. [1] That is if we could get beyond a definition and why it matters if the startup was "well known". "The reality is that this simply isn't how venture funding works." Half of what people are doing today (1/2 is arbitrary to make a point) are things that go against "how" something currently works. "all it does is send a signal that you don't have a real network." But who does it send a signal to? You mean it paints you with a big fat "I'm a newbie and I don't know how things work label?". To be clear I haven't analyzed the value provided by paying this company money and can't say that I would recommend it (or not). But I don't think it's clear that there isn't any value and I am fairly certain that it isn't a scam either [2] that there could be people getting value from it. [1] That said there are many situations in business where the effort and/or money paid doesn't result in a direct benefit like funding or something (and this is important) that is easily measured. [2] Like those real estate seminars which I would say are a scam but I think they have entertainment value for some people. And maybe after you attend one you learn a valuable life lesson for the money spent.
      - tptacek 13y ago
        It's not "known" to me, but I would be willing to bet significantly on the answer. There are things that people don't do because nobody's thought to do it, or because nobody's been willing to accept the risk. But there are also things nobody does because they self-evidently won't work, and paying for introductions to VCs is probably one of those things. The signals it sends is worse than "I'm new"; it's "I was unable to generate interest from investors on my own".
  - Zigurd 13y ago
    No first tier investors show up at events where entrepreneurs pay to pitch. It is only slightly less evil than placement firms that charge a fee to applicants.
- larrik 13y ago
  I really don't want to be defending the target company, but it's only unethical if its unproductive. My point is that the article doesn't actually claim any data or anecdotes where someone actually went there and determined if it was productive or not. I mean, I would never go for that conference, and it sounds like a bad deal to me. The article comes off like witch-hunting, though. Paying to be in the "top 50" is pretty odd, but maybe they mean "the top 50 startups, based on them having enough cash to waste some on being called 'top 50'". Call me cynical, but that fits right in with my impression of east coast VC, which this company seems to be based in.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    It's unproductive, self-evidently so.
650REDHAIR 13y ago
Poorly written article, but YSV does sound pretty shady. I wish Pando would have had one of their own writers take this on instead of some startup CEO.
- larrys 13y ago
  "Poorly written article, but YSV does sound pretty shady." Did you take a look at their website and see the videos of some of the events before making that statement?
  - 650REDHAIR 13y ago
    From their homepage: Get Noticed -> Get Funded -> Grow Faster That's not how it works.

by larrik 13y ago

tptacek 13y ago

Charging un-funded startups to attend a conference to matchmake them with VC's is unproductive and unethical. If there's a problem with this article, it's that it takes hundreds of words trying to unspool drama from such a simple point.

larrys 13y ago
"Charging un-funded startups to attend a conference to matchmake them with VC's is unproductive and unethical." 100% don't agree. [1] Unproductive for the startup? Making contacts and getting some exposure and having discussions (and most importantly making mistakes) is unproductive? How so? Charging? As the retort from the principal of the firm said what are they supposed to do do this for free? And exactly what is unethical? Taking advantage of young people who don't know the difference between what you (or others here) might consider a "legit" opportunity (hey like spending half their life trying to get into the YC or VC lottery to begin with) and this? [1] When I graduated from college on my own dime I paid money to fly to (get this) a "word processing conference" in order to make contacts and establish myself in what (I thought) would be the new business I was starting (computer supplies). Later when starting other businesses I flew to other places to go to expos, shows, whatever I needed to do. I used my own money to do that (that I had earned).
- tptacek 13y ago
  What's a well-known startup that was funded as a result of having paid to meet investors? If you can't name one, the unproductiveness argument is straightforward, and the ethical argument follows from it. The reality is that this simply isn't how venture funding works. Founders don't pay to meet investors; they exercise their own networks to get intros. Paying to expand your network in some obvious was is unhelpful; all it does is send a signal that you don't have a real network.
  - larrys 13y ago
    "What's a well-known startup that was funded as a result of having paid to meet investors?" The answer to that question isn't known to me. Of course if I was the one that was producing the event, and someone asked that question, it would be valid. [1] That is if we could get beyond a definition and why it matters if the startup was "well known". "The reality is that this simply isn't how venture funding works." Half of what people are doing today (1/2 is arbitrary to make a point) are things that go against "how" something currently works. "all it does is send a signal that you don't have a real network." But who does it send a signal to? You mean it paints you with a big fat "I'm a newbie and I don't know how things work label?". To be clear I haven't analyzed the value provided by paying this company money and can't say that I would recommend it (or not). But I don't think it's clear that there isn't any value and I am fairly certain that it isn't a scam either [2] that there could be people getting value from it. [1] That said there are many situations in business where the effort and/or money paid doesn't result in a direct benefit like funding or something (and this is important) that is easily measured. [2] Like those real estate seminars which I would say are a scam but I think they have entertainment value for some people. And maybe after you attend one you learn a valuable life lesson for the money spent.
    - tptacek 13y ago
      It's not "known" to me, but I would be willing to bet significantly on the answer. There are things that people don't do because nobody's thought to do it, or because nobody's been willing to accept the risk. But there are also things nobody does because they self-evidently won't work, and paying for introductions to VCs is probably one of those things. The signals it sends is worse than "I'm new"; it's "I was unable to generate interest from investors on my own".
- Zigurd 13y ago
  No first tier investors show up at events where entrepreneurs pay to pitch. It is only slightly less evil than placement firms that charge a fee to applicants.
larrik 13y ago
I really don't want to be defending the target company, but it's only unethical if its unproductive. My point is that the article doesn't actually claim any data or anecdotes where someone actually went there and determined if it was productive or not. I mean, I would never go for that conference, and it sounds like a bad deal to me. The article comes off like witch-hunting, though. Paying to be in the "top 50" is pretty odd, but maybe they mean "the top 50 startups, based on them having enough cash to waste some on being called 'top 50'". Call me cynical, but that fits right in with my impression of east coast VC, which this company seems to be based in.
- tptacek 13y ago
  It's unproductive, self-evidently so.

650REDHAIR 13y ago

Poorly written article, but YSV does sound pretty shady. I wish Pando would have had one of their own writers take this on instead of some startup CEO.

larrys 13y ago
"Poorly written article, but YSV does sound pretty shady." Did you take a look at their website and see the videos of some of the events before making that statement?
- 650REDHAIR 13y ago
  From their homepage: Get Noticed -> Get Funded -> Grow Faster That's not how it works.