5 ms·

Paul Graham Gets Vague when Boston needs analysis

16 points by dshah 19y ago

natrius 19y ago
"I would like to caveat this section myself and ask the readers a question of even Paul himself should he notice this article, does the more aggressive investor demand a larger percentage of the business for the same amount of investment dollars offered by a less aggressive investor?" In Silicon Valley, you'll get more offers from investors for funding since the investors are more aggressive, and as a result, you're more likely to get a fair market price for equity in your company. More importantly, the quality of the investors in Silicon Valley is likely higher since they have more experience with them and have more connections that could help your company in the future. I don't think there's any way to compare investors in Silicon Valley with those in other areas without the Silicon Valley investors coming out on top.
- anamax 19y ago
  I think that "aggressive" is being misinterpreted. SV VCs have a greater tolerance for risk, at least technology risk. It seems quite reasonable that riskier investments should have greater potential reward. (Otherwise, why take on the additional risk?)
  - natrius 19y ago
    That's what I mean by "aggressive" as well. Since they're more likely to make risky investments, you'll get more offers from VCs.
gibsonf1 19y ago
It sounds like he is asking PG to do his own homework for him.
- theremora 19y ago
  Or maybe I know my limits and minute level of influence compared to PG,
jamescoops 19y ago
great link bait
kansando 19y ago
I think PG and this group are too focused on Web 2.0 companies. So all his talk of superiority of the valley ecosystem is probably right in the consumer-web space. Boston stills kicks ass for enterprise software and biotech.Unfortunately you can't build those with college dropouts.
- rms 19y ago
  Sure you can
  - kansando 19y ago
    Do you have examples to back your assertion?
    - deleted 19y ago
      [deleted]
    - ratsbane 19y ago
      RMS is right. Most of the big enterprise packages were started by college graduates but that certainly doesn't make it a requirement. Most of the big computer companies were started by college graduates, too. And then there was Apple. You can't be innovative by thinking that just because something hasn't been done a certain way before that it shouldn't be done that way. Real innovation REQUIRES violating some generally-accepeted principle of how things should be done. Real innovation is one thing that that the current crop of enterprise software is largely missing.
      - kansando 19y ago
        "Real innovation is one thing that that the current crop of enterprise software is largely missing." Based on what? You don't think virtualization is real innovation? Spend some time learning about Netezza, Endeca, ITA, BladeLogic, Scalent, VMWare... before making blanket statements that are blatantly inaccurate.
        19y ago

16 points by dshah 19y ago

"I would like to caveat this section myself and ask the readers a question of even Paul himself should he notice this article, does the more aggressive investor demand a larger percentage of the business for the same amount of investment dollars offered by a less aggressive investor?" In Silicon Valley, you'll get more offers from investors for funding since the investors are more aggressive, and as a result, you're more likely to get a fair market price for equity in your company. More importantly, the quality of the investors in Silicon Valley is likely higher since they have more experience with them and have more connections that could help your company in the future. I don't think there's any way to compare investors in Silicon Valley with those in other areas without the Silicon Valley investors coming out on top.

anamax 19y ago
I think that "aggressive" is being misinterpreted. SV VCs have a greater tolerance for risk, at least technology risk. It seems quite reasonable that riskier investments should have greater potential reward. (Otherwise, why take on the additional risk?)
- natrius 19y ago
  That's what I mean by "aggressive" as well. Since they're more likely to make risky investments, you'll get more offers from VCs.

gibsonf1 19y ago

It sounds like he is asking PG to do his own homework for him.

theremora 19y ago
Or maybe I know my limits and minute level of influence compared to PG,

jamescoops 19y ago

great link bait

kansando 19y ago

I think PG and this group are too focused on Web 2.0 companies. So all his talk of superiority of the valley ecosystem is probably right in the consumer-web space. Boston stills kicks ass for enterprise software and biotech.Unfortunately you can't build those with college dropouts.

rms 19y ago
Sure you can
- kansando 19y ago
  Do you have examples to back your assertion?
  - deleted 19y ago
    [deleted]
  - ratsbane 19y ago
    RMS is right. Most of the big enterprise packages were started by college graduates but that certainly doesn't make it a requirement. Most of the big computer companies were started by college graduates, too. And then there was Apple. You can't be innovative by thinking that just because something hasn't been done a certain way before that it shouldn't be done that way. Real innovation REQUIRES violating some generally-accepeted principle of how things should be done. Real innovation is one thing that that the current crop of enterprise software is largely missing.
    - kansando 19y ago
      "Real innovation is one thing that that the current crop of enterprise software is largely missing." Based on what? You don't think virtualization is real innovation? Spend some time learning about Netezza, Endeca, ITA, BladeLogic, Scalent, VMWare... before making blanket statements that are blatantly inaccurate.
      - 19y ago