3 ms·

quizprep you know better than most in AR. There's a bit of chicken and egg to entrepreneur and vc happening. Do you think increasing startup density will help?

quizprep you know better than most in AR. There's a bit of chicken and egg to entrepreneur and vc happening. Do you think increasing startup density will help? Should this be program driven or entrepreneur/mentor driven? Will your "venture production studio" look like TechStars (programmatic), YC (mentor network), or a different variation. I get pissed off at the amount of people who say we need more entrepreneurship compared to people shutting up and building. Do you know folks who have the means to be entrepreneurs in AR, but are sitting on the sidelines?

quizprep 12y ago
I'm going to "shut up and build" right alongside the entrepreneurs. (BTW - Love that phrase... I'm stealing it!) Clearly this approach is not very scalable longterm across dozens of companies if I do it alone. So I'm building a team of full-time, world-class experts (design, dev, growth hackers, entrepreneurs, etc) to also "shut up and build." With the small team I've assembled, we can build half a dozen "obviously fundable" projects over the next 6 months. The deal flow is there - in fact, if additional resources were available, we could launch a dozen. If I can't find a lead investor for the new projects, I'll simply lead the rounds myself and hope others follow... again, not long term sustainable (I'm not a blazillionaire.) But by leading the first dozen ventures myself, I believe the lemming-like investors who follow on behind my lead can begin to get some comfort around building a portfolio. Statistics and history tell us that we need to take at least 50 GOOD swings to build a homerun (Series C) business. As a state, we need to take a minimum of 50 GOOD swings every year. (Note the emphasis on the word "good.") To your second question: I ABSOLUTELY know of entrepreneurs who are sitting on the sidelines due to lack of seed funding. A couple dozen, actually. I'm not talking middling college grads either - I'm talking mid-career 25-35 year old, A+ rockstars who are experts in their field who have a fundable business plan gathering dust. They don't jump because the risk is too great. And I don't fault them for that. Think about it - as a society who wants more entrepreneurs, we're asking potential entrepreneurs to abandon a steady paycheck at a cushy job AND risk their entire life savings to fund their new venture. Entrepreneurs shouldn't have to bear ALL the risk... even with seed funding, entrepreneurs still shoulder the VAST majority of risk. Abandoning a steady paycheck is hard enough... someone willing to that AND risk their life savings is likely clinically insane. As a culture without seed funding readily-available for the best and brightest, I believe we're building a startup system than selects for the clinically insane! The last thing we need is a bunch of mediocre (perhaps insane) entrepreneurs pursuing mediocre ideas receiving seed funding from mediocre sources.

quizprep 12y ago

I'm going to "shut up and build" right alongside the entrepreneurs. (BTW - Love that phrase... I'm stealing it!) Clearly this approach is not very scalable longterm across dozens of companies if I do it alone. So I'm building a team of full-time, world-class experts (design, dev, growth hackers, entrepreneurs, etc) to also "shut up and build." With the small team I've assembled, we can build half a dozen "obviously fundable" projects over the next 6 months. The deal flow is there - in fact, if additional resources were available, we could launch a dozen. If I can't find a lead investor for the new projects, I'll simply lead the rounds myself and hope others follow... again, not long term sustainable (I'm not a blazillionaire.) But by leading the first dozen ventures myself, I believe the lemming-like investors who follow on behind my lead can begin to get some comfort around building a portfolio. Statistics and history tell us that we need to take at least 50 GOOD swings to build a homerun (Series C) business. As a state, we need to take a minimum of 50 GOOD swings every year. (Note the emphasis on the word "good.") To your second question: I ABSOLUTELY know of entrepreneurs who are sitting on the sidelines due to lack of seed funding. A couple dozen, actually. I'm not talking middling college grads either - I'm talking mid-career 25-35 year old, A+ rockstars who are experts in their field who have a fundable business plan gathering dust. They don't jump because the risk is too great. And I don't fault them for that. Think about it - as a society who wants more entrepreneurs, we're asking potential entrepreneurs to abandon a steady paycheck at a cushy job AND risk their entire life savings to fund their new venture. Entrepreneurs shouldn't have to bear ALL the risk... even with seed funding, entrepreneurs still shoulder the VAST majority of risk. Abandoning a steady paycheck is hard enough... someone willing to that AND risk their life savings is likely clinically insane. As a culture without seed funding readily-available for the best and brightest, I believe we're building a startup system than selects for the clinically insane! The last thing we need is a bunch of mediocre (perhaps insane) entrepreneurs pursuing mediocre ideas receiving seed funding from mediocre sources.