6 ms·

And now, some smoking guns (or “part two of angels that charge”)

54 points by malvosenior 17y ago

jasonmcalacanis 17y ago
Thanks for posting this. We're going to have these people on this Friday's This Week in Startups at 1PM pacific. http://bit.ly/mW2zR http://bit.ly/mW2zR If you know anyone from Keiretsu Forum who had a GOOD or bad experience we're looking to have them on the show.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  The story there makes you wonder how many investments they actually did.
- qeorge 17y ago
  Unshortened URL: http://thisweekinstartups.com/ http://thisweekinstartups.com/ (no need for bit.ly) Enjoyed the post, keep it up.
workhorse 17y ago
Kudos to Jason Calacanis. I'll be spreading the world through my channels.
- workhorse 17y ago
  *word
alttab 17y ago
I love this - people are waking up and challenging the old guard which at least to me seems to be motivated by profit at any cost. We see this with corporations, government, and even web businesses at every level. We have spawned a new generation of idealism where profit is a side effect of actually giving a shit about our customers. What a concept.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  The 'old' guard in VC land definitely isn't in on it, I see it more as a bunch of highway robbers calling themselves VCs, making money of people that are somehow desperate.
- hristov 17y ago
  I don't think the problem with the old guard is merely greed. Lets face it the new guard is pretty greedy too. I think the problem with the old guard is the notion that they can make money simply by virtue of their connections. This is something that is embedded in new york finance and business culture. You make connections and get rich by introducing people to one another and taking a cut for the privilege. Thus, investment banks are not really banks in the traditional sense of the word but are more like brokers that connect investors with people that need capital. With the internet, this model will change and is changing. It is not that hard for people to connect and one does not need to pay hefty fees to do it. So the old cliché about the internet cutting out the middleman is actually slowly happening in the world of finance after it happened in the worlds of computer sales, book sales, automobile parts, music sales, etc. I think intermediaries will still be important but they will have to bring more to the table than merely having a fat rolodex. They will probably have to be able to do much more filtering and the like. For example, I-banks can still make a lot of money if they are able to select good investments for their investors. But lately they have not done well in that department.
bonsaitree 17y ago
Um, it's none of YOUR business how these firms run their deals. Not that I find the practice equitable, nor a lawsuit meritorious on the available information, but if that's THEIR business model and the founders are willing to fork over the cash, that's THEIR CHOICE. If you really want to FIX this, offer up a viable structured alternative to aggressively pursue their business. It's easy to throw spit-balls from the back of the classroom. I'd expect much more from somebody who's been down that road--on both sides of the table. Instead this whole affair comes across, in gestalt, as a series of public ad hominem attacks on other parties and a plea for personal attention in the minimus. If your ambition is to be a "shock podcaster" and garner a Dave Winer-esque reputation, you're, sadly, headed down the right track. You complained about being publicly "berated" at Gnomedex '07. Kettle. Pot. Black.
- BRadmin 17y ago
  Posting people's personal experiences in dealing with these organizations, with the willingness to publicize contrary opinions (ie positive experiences), and letting individuals decide for themselves is a tribute to the community. The inner-workings of these groups are generally clandestine - exposing information not readily-available to the average entrepreneur about them can't be a bad thing.
  - jasonmcalacanis 17y ago
    Word.
  - bonsaitree 17y ago
    That would be fine IF there was any semblance of an open/neutral forum and Calacanis hadn't already used blanketing statements. What sane set of founders would voluntarily violate agreements to "come out" publicly FOR their experiences in this context? It's a rigged trial. As I've already stated, from what's been published, I disagree with these practices, but we're only hearing "leaked documents" from ONE SOURCE. There's ZERO discourse here--just fear mongering and name-calling. It all comes across as extremely pandering and childish. Hopefully, that will change. It would be one thing if Calacanis had some semblance of independence, but as a partner in Sequioa, he is, quite literally, a fiduciary in a competing firm. How would you like to have your business's private contractual affairs paraded in front of a bully pulpit?
marze 17y ago
From a potential investor's point of view, would you want to invest in a startup that spent scarce funds on a scheme like those mentioned here instead of adding value in another way?
lawrence 17y ago
I always get a little nervous when third parties, whether it be the government or folks like Jason Calacanis, try and tell companies how they should price their products. I don't want anyone telling me how to price my company's products. Pay per pitch is sleazy. But it's not illegal. (not talking about the deceptive pay per pitch, that's a different story)
- jasonmcalacanis 17y ago
  No one said it was illegal... oh wait, actually someone said it might be.... but that's besides the point! The issue here is the free market, and my email newsletter/blog are part of the "free market forces." The testimonials from folks who felt ripped off, or worked at Keiretsu, are also free-market forces. In fact, so is this thread. so, don't worry about me telling them the price because they can ignore me!
  - dantheman 17y ago
    Agreed, reputation is one of the most important aspects of the free market. It's expensive to build and can be destroyed quickly.
  - lawrence 17y ago
    Eh, you have a big stage. You are difficult to ignore. Seems a bit heavy handed to try and put these guys out of business, but I don't care enough about the issue to make a stand for pay per pitch guys (who I choose not to pay). Rock on.
grellas 17y ago
This is very helpful information for entrepreneurs, and I commend the poster for his courage, but I think it is highly risky from a legal standpoint. The use of phrases such as "bogus forums" can readily be attacked, and (in my long experience in the law) it is precisely those who are most unscrupulous who are quickest to seize on technical points to try to bludgeon you in the courts. Does "bogus" connote fraudulent? Is there nothing at all of value that is being offered? Maybe not. But using this type of phrase puts the one who is otherwise exposing questionable practices in the position of potentially having to prove that the forums are nothing but frauds, which might be hard to prove. Yes, free speech is involved but an attack on someone's manner of making a living sets one up for "libel per se" charges, which can be tough to fight. With the web as the forum, the claimant can also shop forums to find the most sympathetic court available. I have fought fights like this before, and I know what they involve. They need to be fought in a way that is effective and not merely righteous. The latter is not bad but can be undermined if you give your opponent gratuitous ammunition with which to attack. It is my belief that the same fight can be waged at a slightly more philosophical level and remain completely effective. Therefore, the risks being taken by naming specific parties and using phrases such as "bogus forums" will only serve to weaken an otherwise compelling position being advanced by a strong proponent of a good cause. At this point, whatever has been done has been done and the fight will proceed legally at the level just described. It will take a lot to fend off the vicious attacks to come. I wish the author well in his endeavor. He is on to something and I hope he can handle it effectively. The entrepreneurial community will certainly benefit from his efforts.
- netsp 17y ago
  I agree that this can probably be just as effective while avoiding making claims that may not stand up in court (eg, "bogus forums," & "nothing but frauds") but avoiding naming firms and keeping it all high level and philosophical is not as effective, even if it is probably safer. If you have a legal background, I think you might want to see if you can find precedents in the talent (modelling, acting, script-writing) fields.

54 points by malvosenior 17y ago

Thanks for posting this. We're going to have these people on this Friday's This Week in Startups at 1PM pacific. http://bit.ly/mW2zR http://bit.ly/mW2zR If you know anyone from Keiretsu Forum who had a GOOD or bad experience we're looking to have them on the show.

jacquesm 17y ago
The story there makes you wonder how many investments they actually did.
qeorge 17y ago
Unshortened URL: http://thisweekinstartups.com/ http://thisweekinstartups.com/ (no need for bit.ly) Enjoyed the post, keep it up.

workhorse 17y ago

Kudos to Jason Calacanis. I'll be spreading the world through my channels.

workhorse 17y ago
*word

alttab 17y ago

I love this - people are waking up and challenging the old guard which at least to me seems to be motivated by profit at any cost. We see this with corporations, government, and even web businesses at every level. We have spawned a new generation of idealism where profit is a side effect of actually giving a shit about our customers. What a concept.

jacquesm 17y ago
The 'old' guard in VC land definitely isn't in on it, I see it more as a bunch of highway robbers calling themselves VCs, making money of people that are somehow desperate.
hristov 17y ago
I don't think the problem with the old guard is merely greed. Lets face it the new guard is pretty greedy too. I think the problem with the old guard is the notion that they can make money simply by virtue of their connections. This is something that is embedded in new york finance and business culture. You make connections and get rich by introducing people to one another and taking a cut for the privilege. Thus, investment banks are not really banks in the traditional sense of the word but are more like brokers that connect investors with people that need capital. With the internet, this model will change and is changing. It is not that hard for people to connect and one does not need to pay hefty fees to do it. So the old cliché about the internet cutting out the middleman is actually slowly happening in the world of finance after it happened in the worlds of computer sales, book sales, automobile parts, music sales, etc. I think intermediaries will still be important but they will have to bring more to the table than merely having a fat rolodex. They will probably have to be able to do much more filtering and the like. For example, I-banks can still make a lot of money if they are able to select good investments for their investors. But lately they have not done well in that department.

bonsaitree 17y ago

Um, it's none of YOUR business how these firms run their deals. Not that I find the practice equitable, nor a lawsuit meritorious on the available information, but if that's THEIR business model and the founders are willing to fork over the cash, that's THEIR CHOICE. If you really want to FIX this, offer up a viable structured alternative to aggressively pursue their business. It's easy to throw spit-balls from the back of the classroom. I'd expect much more from somebody who's been down that road--on both sides of the table. Instead this whole affair comes across, in gestalt, as a series of public ad hominem attacks on other parties and a plea for personal attention in the minimus. If your ambition is to be a "shock podcaster" and garner a Dave Winer-esque reputation, you're, sadly, headed down the right track. You complained about being publicly "berated" at Gnomedex '07. Kettle. Pot. Black.

BRadmin 17y ago
Posting people's personal experiences in dealing with these organizations, with the willingness to publicize contrary opinions (ie positive experiences), and letting individuals decide for themselves is a tribute to the community. The inner-workings of these groups are generally clandestine - exposing information not readily-available to the average entrepreneur about them can't be a bad thing.
- jasonmcalacanis 17y ago
  Word.
- bonsaitree 17y ago
  That would be fine IF there was any semblance of an open/neutral forum and Calacanis hadn't already used blanketing statements. What sane set of founders would voluntarily violate agreements to "come out" publicly FOR their experiences in this context? It's a rigged trial. As I've already stated, from what's been published, I disagree with these practices, but we're only hearing "leaked documents" from ONE SOURCE. There's ZERO discourse here--just fear mongering and name-calling. It all comes across as extremely pandering and childish. Hopefully, that will change. It would be one thing if Calacanis had some semblance of independence, but as a partner in Sequioa, he is, quite literally, a fiduciary in a competing firm. How would you like to have your business's private contractual affairs paraded in front of a bully pulpit?

marze 17y ago

From a potential investor's point of view, would you want to invest in a startup that spent scarce funds on a scheme like those mentioned here instead of adding value in another way?

lawrence 17y ago

I always get a little nervous when third parties, whether it be the government or folks like Jason Calacanis, try and tell companies how they should price their products. I don't want anyone telling me how to price my company's products. Pay per pitch is sleazy. But it's not illegal. (not talking about the deceptive pay per pitch, that's a different story)

jasonmcalacanis 17y ago
No one said it was illegal... oh wait, actually someone said it might be.... but that's besides the point! The issue here is the free market, and my email newsletter/blog are part of the "free market forces." The testimonials from folks who felt ripped off, or worked at Keiretsu, are also free-market forces. In fact, so is this thread. so, don't worry about me telling them the price because they can ignore me!
- dantheman 17y ago
  Agreed, reputation is one of the most important aspects of the free market. It's expensive to build and can be destroyed quickly.
- lawrence 17y ago
  Eh, you have a big stage. You are difficult to ignore. Seems a bit heavy handed to try and put these guys out of business, but I don't care enough about the issue to make a stand for pay per pitch guys (who I choose not to pay). Rock on.

grellas 17y ago

This is very helpful information for entrepreneurs, and I commend the poster for his courage, but I think it is highly risky from a legal standpoint. The use of phrases such as "bogus forums" can readily be attacked, and (in my long experience in the law) it is precisely those who are most unscrupulous who are quickest to seize on technical points to try to bludgeon you in the courts. Does "bogus" connote fraudulent? Is there nothing at all of value that is being offered? Maybe not. But using this type of phrase puts the one who is otherwise exposing questionable practices in the position of potentially having to prove that the forums are nothing but frauds, which might be hard to prove. Yes, free speech is involved but an attack on someone's manner of making a living sets one up for "libel per se" charges, which can be tough to fight. With the web as the forum, the claimant can also shop forums to find the most sympathetic court available. I have fought fights like this before, and I know what they involve. They need to be fought in a way that is effective and not merely righteous. The latter is not bad but can be undermined if you give your opponent gratuitous ammunition with which to attack. It is my belief that the same fight can be waged at a slightly more philosophical level and remain completely effective. Therefore, the risks being taken by naming specific parties and using phrases such as "bogus forums" will only serve to weaken an otherwise compelling position being advanced by a strong proponent of a good cause. At this point, whatever has been done has been done and the fight will proceed legally at the level just described. It will take a lot to fend off the vicious attacks to come. I wish the author well in his endeavor. He is on to something and I hope he can handle it effectively. The entrepreneurial community will certainly benefit from his efforts.

netsp 17y ago
I agree that this can probably be just as effective while avoiding making claims that may not stand up in court (eg, "bogus forums," & "nothing but frauds") but avoiding naming firms and keeping it all high level and philosophical is not as effective, even if it is probably safer. If you have a legal background, I think you might want to see if you can find precedents in the talent (modelling, acting, script-writing) fields.