3 ms·

KP halted? Really? What good investments have they actually made in the last 3-4 years? KPCB completely missed out on the Web2.0 while their competitors made bi

by nickb 19y ago

KP halted? Really? What good investments have they actually made in the last 3-4 years? KPCB completely missed out on the Web2.0 while their competitors made billions. Look at their portfolio... it's devoid of anything that made it big in the last few years. As for Randy Komisar, he's a new VC who hasn't had a SINGLE exit! He's been trashing Web 2.0 for a while now and has contributed to KPCB's decline. KP used to be a tier-1 VC firm that "got it" and in the past two years, they've become a tier-2 firm. I routinely tell entrepreneurs to go and practice their pitch at KP since they will ask tough questions and not make an investment because they won't get it in the end. Look here how he's trashing Web 2.0 earlier this year: http://www.venturebeat.com/2007/01/03/with-web-20-its-easy-to-get-muddled/ http://www.venturebeat.com/2007/01/03/with-web-20-its-easy-t... And look at his portfolio: http://www.kpcb.com/team/index.php?Randy%20Komisar http://www.kpcb.com/team/index.php?Randy%20Komisar ALL duds. Sour grapes, Randy?! PS: No wonder Vinod Khosla left KPCB.. he probably got sick of slowness and influx of people who suck at envisioning the future and investing based on a vision.

hello_moto 19y ago
I may not be into web 2.0, silicon valley or all these website stuffs but when I checked their website: http://www.kpcb.com/portfolio/ http://www.kpcb.com/portfolio/ , I think they did okay with Google and Amazon(doing a bit well this year) in the web arena. After all are there any startup within 3-4 years that got bought out and the VC won big time other than YouTube? Remember, all Facebook has is "valuation". Maybe Randy is looking at the real world and he's thinking that none of these web companies that he invested are going to give him a big payout (in the area of hundred millions) so he prefers to move to a bigger industry: energy and oil. It's understandable. On the other hand, Vinod seems to have his own venture now. Maybe that's what he wanted: his own. Go to his venture website and check the Renewable Portfolio section: http://www.khoslaventures.com/ http://www.khoslaventures.com/ , I don't see any web company (even though I knew Vinod invest in several web companies within 2-4 years since 2002/2003 ish). Khosla ventures is investing in Energy companies too.
- brezina 19y ago
  The Khosla Ventures website leaves a lot to be desired. I nearly told Vinod this one day before his partner told me that it was designed by Vinod's daughter. Truth is KV has invested in many new web companies including big guys like Slide and RingCentral. Maybe they just don't want a ton of inbound slide decks from web 2.0 companies making sticky note apps.
- sabat 19y ago
  You have good points, but this article really isn't about Amazon or Google or their recent developments. This KP guy presumes: - you need VC to get a startup off the ground - the end game for all startup people is a $billion+ IPO or buyout - "web 2.0" has any real meaning. We all know "web 2.0" doesn't really mean anything in itself: it's just a stamp we're putting on the current state of the web. Unless the whole web is about to die, I think we're OK.

by nickb 19y ago

hello_moto 19y ago

I may not be into web 2.0, silicon valley or all these website stuffs but when I checked their website: http://www.kpcb.com/portfolio/ http://www.kpcb.com/portfolio/ , I think they did okay with Google and Amazon(doing a bit well this year) in the web arena. After all are there any startup within 3-4 years that got bought out and the VC won big time other than YouTube? Remember, all Facebook has is "valuation". Maybe Randy is looking at the real world and he's thinking that none of these web companies that he invested are going to give him a big payout (in the area of hundred millions) so he prefers to move to a bigger industry: energy and oil. It's understandable. On the other hand, Vinod seems to have his own venture now. Maybe that's what he wanted: his own. Go to his venture website and check the Renewable Portfolio section: http://www.khoslaventures.com/ http://www.khoslaventures.com/ , I don't see any web company (even though I knew Vinod invest in several web companies within 2-4 years since 2002/2003 ish). Khosla ventures is investing in Energy companies too.

brezina 19y ago
The Khosla Ventures website leaves a lot to be desired. I nearly told Vinod this one day before his partner told me that it was designed by Vinod's daughter. Truth is KV has invested in many new web companies including big guys like Slide and RingCentral. Maybe they just don't want a ton of inbound slide decks from web 2.0 companies making sticky note apps.
sabat 19y ago
You have good points, but this article really isn't about Amazon or Google or their recent developments. This KP guy presumes: - you need VC to get a startup off the ground - the end game for all startup people is a $billion+ IPO or buyout - "web 2.0" has any real meaning. We all know "web 2.0" doesn't really mean anything in itself: it's just a stamp we're putting on the current state of the web. Unless the whole web is about to die, I think we're OK.