6 ms·

Cool, but... Why is A16z building an engineering team?

grosen 13y ago
Probably want to internally build some products. Makes for much better returns when you own 50+% of a company vs. ~20% via traditional funding.
Oculus 13y ago
My guess is to have an in-house team that can help out the companies they fund. I know that Netflix's cloud architect, Adrian Cockcroft, left to join a venture capital firm to advise on scaling issues for companies that firm funded[0]. 0 - http://gigaom.com/2014/01/07/netflixs-cloud-architect-adrian-cockcroft-is-leaving-to-join-battery-ventures/ http://gigaom.com/2014/01/07/netflixs-cloud-architect-adrian...
- pmarca 13y ago
  "My guess is to have an in-house team that can help out the companies they fund." Nope.
  - seizethecheese 13y ago
    I'm really curious... a hint?
- rythie 13y ago
  It's a big assumption though, and you need to spend 3 hours to find out what you are actually applying for.
  - fsk 13y ago
    You spend 3 hours to MAYBE find out what you're applying for. If you fail, presumably that's the end of the process.
cnaut 13y ago
Probably to build internal tools. A lot of VCs firms are trying to apply more data to their investment decisions and that requires internal tools to handle it all. Also makes sense given the qualifications they are asking for.
- graycat 13y ago
  A better way: Actually read and understand the submissions from the entrepreneurs!
  - ironchef 13y ago
    Are you suggesting that a16z doesn't do this? Or that their firm is not doing well? It would seem to me that their limited track record is ... more than adequate. Similarly, I would infer that your suggestion is ignorant that they have interest in the companies post-funding (as cnaut suggests "A lot of VCs firms are trying to apply more data to their investment decisions and that requires internal tools to handle it all"... which I think would suggest that they would want to examine the results of said decisions as well (which goes beyond simply the submission process)).
    - graycat 13y ago
      > Are you suggesting that a16z doesn't do this? Yes I am. (1) It appears, really is quite clear, that they have high contempt for initial contacts from entrepreneurs via e-mail. Instead they want to believe that the 'good' entrepreneurs will have enough 'exposure', enough in 'networking', and enough in 'hustle', e.g., on LinkedIn, GetHub, etc., to come to the attention of A16Z by means other than an e-mail message "over the transom". E.g., they want an entrepreneur to get introductions from bankers, lawyers, accountants, or CEO's of companies in the A16Z portfolio. So, A16Z (A) wants others to 'filter' their entrepreneurs for them and/or (B) believes that lawyers, etc. are good sources of good recommendations. Nonsense. (2) A16Z will just refuse to consider any very technical support for a project. E.g., if a project has some powerful, valuable 'secret sauce', intellectual property, and high technological barrier to entry, A16Z can easily just dismiss the technical issues, the project, and the entrepreneur. A16Z wants to believe that they have 'deep domain knowledge' where they invest and, thus, wants to believe that anything new that A16Z has not heard of must be nonsense. If some supporting technical material is not easy reading for them, then they believe that they are justified in just regarding it as nonsense. But, looking at the partners of A16Z, it's tough to find one with enough technical qualifications and/or accomplishments to (A) get a tenure track position in the engineering school of a leading research university, (B) be an editor of a leading technical journal of original research, (C) publish a peer-reviewed paper of original research in a technical field in a good or better journal of original research, or (D) get an NSF grant for original research. Net, A16Z apparently is not competent to review or even to direct a competent review of technical material in information technology. What the A16Z financial performance really is is likely not easy to discover. You seem to suggest that the project for which the OP is some recruiting is for an internal information system to do causal modeling and make valuable predictions for venture investing. It would appear that they want to do cross tabulation and curve fitting; sorry, there is nearly no chance those techniques will work. Why? In simple terms, they are looking for new, exceptional cases, and looking at 'averages' from the past, even of successes in the past, is just intellectual self-abuse. If they are making money, then, fine. But from all I can see, in information technology their competence is way below a level that would be useful for actual technical work or doing a technical review of such work. I've been around technical work in US national security, US business and start ups, including one of the most successful venture funded companies ever, and high end academic research, hold a Ph.D. in engineering from one of the world's best research universities, have published peer-reviewed original research in computer science, applied mathematics, and artificial intelligence, and in comparison the technical qualifications of A16Z look like a bad joke. Yes, most good quantitative analysis needs some computing and programming. So, in their recruiting A16Z seems to believe that the computing, which is necessary, is also sufficient. It's not. By an analogy, A16Z is looking for nurse practitioners instead of MD physicians. Both are necessary, but the nurse practitioners are not sufficient. There is a difference! But, why help A16Z? They have money enough now!
gautamsivakumar 13y ago
They have $4.2bn under management, and a very smart team. I am sure there is a lot that can be done...
neil_s 13y ago
My guess would be a team to provide a data-centric approach to investment. Crunch a whole lot of numbers to identify industry trends and specific firms that are promising, and see if those can replicate human performance. Or they're simply handling recruitment for a stealth portfolio startup.
- graycat 13y ago
  > industry trends Why? The VC firms never invest in an "industry", i.e., there are no such 'index funds'. Instead, VC firms invest in individual companies, and there what is just crucial is what the company does. If the company looks good, then mostly to heck with the darned industry. > Or they're simply handling recruitment for a stealth portfolio startup. In this case, poor startup: A16Z is doing a "piss poor" job 'helping' the startup!

Probably want to internally build some products. Makes for much better returns when you own 50+% of a company vs. ~20% via traditional funding.

Oculus 13y ago

My guess is to have an in-house team that can help out the companies they fund. I know that Netflix's cloud architect, Adrian Cockcroft, left to join a venture capital firm to advise on scaling issues for companies that firm funded[0]. 0 - http://gigaom.com/2014/01/07/netflixs-cloud-architect-adrian-cockcroft-is-leaving-to-join-battery-ventures/ http://gigaom.com/2014/01/07/netflixs-cloud-architect-adrian...

pmarca 13y ago
"My guess is to have an in-house team that can help out the companies they fund." Nope.
- seizethecheese 13y ago
  I'm really curious... a hint?
rythie 13y ago
It's a big assumption though, and you need to spend 3 hours to find out what you are actually applying for.
- fsk 13y ago
  You spend 3 hours to MAYBE find out what you're applying for. If you fail, presumably that's the end of the process.

cnaut 13y ago

Probably to build internal tools. A lot of VCs firms are trying to apply more data to their investment decisions and that requires internal tools to handle it all. Also makes sense given the qualifications they are asking for.

graycat 13y ago
A better way: Actually read and understand the submissions from the entrepreneurs!
- ironchef 13y ago
  Are you suggesting that a16z doesn't do this? Or that their firm is not doing well? It would seem to me that their limited track record is ... more than adequate. Similarly, I would infer that your suggestion is ignorant that they have interest in the companies post-funding (as cnaut suggests "A lot of VCs firms are trying to apply more data to their investment decisions and that requires internal tools to handle it all"... which I think would suggest that they would want to examine the results of said decisions as well (which goes beyond simply the submission process)).
  - graycat 13y ago
    > Are you suggesting that a16z doesn't do this? Yes I am. (1) It appears, really is quite clear, that they have high contempt for initial contacts from entrepreneurs via e-mail. Instead they want to believe that the 'good' entrepreneurs will have enough 'exposure', enough in 'networking', and enough in 'hustle', e.g., on LinkedIn, GetHub, etc., to come to the attention of A16Z by means other than an e-mail message "over the transom". E.g., they want an entrepreneur to get introductions from bankers, lawyers, accountants, or CEO's of companies in the A16Z portfolio. So, A16Z (A) wants others to 'filter' their entrepreneurs for them and/or (B) believes that lawyers, etc. are good sources of good recommendations. Nonsense. (2) A16Z will just refuse to consider any very technical support for a project. E.g., if a project has some powerful, valuable 'secret sauce', intellectual property, and high technological barrier to entry, A16Z can easily just dismiss the technical issues, the project, and the entrepreneur. A16Z wants to believe that they have 'deep domain knowledge' where they invest and, thus, wants to believe that anything new that A16Z has not heard of must be nonsense. If some supporting technical material is not easy reading for them, then they believe that they are justified in just regarding it as nonsense. But, looking at the partners of A16Z, it's tough to find one with enough technical qualifications and/or accomplishments to (A) get a tenure track position in the engineering school of a leading research university, (B) be an editor of a leading technical journal of original research, (C) publish a peer-reviewed paper of original research in a technical field in a good or better journal of original research, or (D) get an NSF grant for original research. Net, A16Z apparently is not competent to review or even to direct a competent review of technical material in information technology. What the A16Z financial performance really is is likely not easy to discover. You seem to suggest that the project for which the OP is some recruiting is for an internal information system to do causal modeling and make valuable predictions for venture investing. It would appear that they want to do cross tabulation and curve fitting; sorry, there is nearly no chance those techniques will work. Why? In simple terms, they are looking for new, exceptional cases, and looking at 'averages' from the past, even of successes in the past, is just intellectual self-abuse. If they are making money, then, fine. But from all I can see, in information technology their competence is way below a level that would be useful for actual technical work or doing a technical review of such work. I've been around technical work in US national security, US business and start ups, including one of the most successful venture funded companies ever, and high end academic research, hold a Ph.D. in engineering from one of the world's best research universities, have published peer-reviewed original research in computer science, applied mathematics, and artificial intelligence, and in comparison the technical qualifications of A16Z look like a bad joke. Yes, most good quantitative analysis needs some computing and programming. So, in their recruiting A16Z seems to believe that the computing, which is necessary, is also sufficient. It's not. By an analogy, A16Z is looking for nurse practitioners instead of MD physicians. Both are necessary, but the nurse practitioners are not sufficient. There is a difference! But, why help A16Z? They have money enough now!

gautamsivakumar 13y ago

They have $4.2bn under management, and a very smart team. I am sure there is a lot that can be done...

neil_s 13y ago

My guess would be a team to provide a data-centric approach to investment. Crunch a whole lot of numbers to identify industry trends and specific firms that are promising, and see if those can replicate human performance. Or they're simply handling recruitment for a stealth portfolio startup.

graycat 13y ago
> industry trends Why? The VC firms never invest in an "industry", i.e., there are no such 'index funds'. Instead, VC firms invest in individual companies, and there what is just crucial is what the company does. If the company looks good, then mostly to heck with the darned industry. > Or they're simply handling recruitment for a stealth portfolio startup. In this case, poor startup: A16Z is doing a "piss poor" job 'helping' the startup!