There is a yawning gap emerging in the world and I think this gap will define the advancement of societies, the creation of jobs, and even the happiness of populations in the decades to come: it is access to mobile data and I call it Flintstones vs. Jetsons. (shout out to April Rudin for the headline).
Generation segue: Some of us remember Fred Flintstone. Worked in a quarry, drove a foot pedal car. Loved to bowl and eat steaks. Life was simple, and there was not a lot of reason to innovate. Pebbles and BamBam didn’t seem to be a big generational culture gap. A loveable guy in the Jackie Gleason vein.
And his cartoon counterpart, George Jetson. Worked are Spacely, drove an automated space scooter. Astro walked himself, Rosie the Robot did the chores. Skyped with the office, used the tele-puter on his wrist. Loveable knucklehead is in a fast-moving world, but he kept adapting and he kept pace.
So my point, my belief, is that we have arrived at a crucial inflection point in our history, where people, countries, leaders (and entire industries) are choosing to go Flintsone or Jetson. And the catalyst for this decision is, clearly, the smart phone and the data it generates. The Flintstone are content with how things are. They have found ways to live until now without technology, and they resolved they would coast from here on in, whether in their carreers or their lives. Financial planners are on the list. So is much of the financial services (non retail) industry. Traditional media has hated the transition. KONY is no fan. Nor is Assad, or Mubarak. People of a certain age (but not all!). There are lots more.
Meanwhile, the Jetsons accelerate. The gap has not even yet begun to present itself.
mOcean at Mobile World Congress
If you have any doubt of how quickly this industry has grown, check out the Mojiva/Mocean (I am an investor) booth at The Mobile World Congress. MWC was, five years ago, just a bunch of suits from Nordic and Asian countries wielding flip phones for voice and text. Today, MWC is heralded as the biggest and the best mobile technology event in the world. According to conference organizer the GSMA, this year’s event played host to a record number of attendees, topping out at 67,000 visitors from 205 countries; an 11% increase over the 2011 show. The four-day conference and exhibition attracted mobile operators, software companies, equipment providers, Internet companies and media and entertainment organizations, as well as government delegations from across the globe. More than 50 percent of this year’s attendees hold C-level positions, including more than 3,500 CEOs.
Most telling perhaps, CEO’s were wearing jeans, T’s and blazers…
So here’s the shocker datapoint from cisco: 40% of the worlds smartphone data is consumed by… 1% of the world population. That means a small group of people are gaining an unfair (perhaps) advantage because of their access to information
The subways are down: take the bus.
This new place is overcrowded: here’s another local option.
Gas prices are skyrocketing, but discounted in NJ this weekend.
This client has spent xxx seconds on the site and is ready to take the next buying step
Yo Twitter! The rally to unseat the government has been moved to the following sidestreet!
The examples go on and on. A few minutes saved. A better solution for the moment. A bit more background before the interview. A better way, on the way. Compound that millions of times over billions of people and guess what: you have a new gap between the haves and the have-nots. Food for thought before you make your choice between Flintstone or Jetson!
People that witnessed my hoarse performance at this week’s Young Start Up Panel learned I had spent the previous night at U2 show. And believe it or not, U2 can teach entrepreneurs an awful lot about success, because they live a few of its basic principles:
They have meaning and relevance
They understand timeliness
They have local impact with a global reach
They live with respect, gratitude and humility
Five years ago, a lifelong friend Mark (MvK) and I caught U2 at Croke Park in Dublin. We were so impressed, we spent the rest of the night in Temple Bar debating their ranking in “The Most Influential Bands of All Time,” along with perhaps the Stones and The Beatles. I cover that and more in this blog from way back when.
This week, Bono, Edge, Mark and I all reunited in the Meadowlands with a few others (!) and we conceded the Most Influential Band of our Lifetime to U2. The group’s tours ranked them second in total concert grosses for the decade after The Rolling Stones, although U2 had a significantly higher attendance figure than the Stones. They were the only band in the top 25 touring acts of the 2000s to sell out every show they played. In April 2011, the U2 360° Tour became the highest-grossing tour in history, surpassing earnings of $558 million and breaking The Stones’ previous record.
Any entrepreneur with this level of success does not need my advice. But numbers alone are not the reason for our award to U2. In order to transcend a niche, sustain your existence, leave a legacy, and essentially change the world for the better, a band –or even an entrepreneur – needs to consider these big four points:
Point #1) Meaning and relevance
How well are you listening and knowing your audience? Of all the millions of fans that U2 has performed in front of, they have always forfeited 20% of their audience to “backstage blindness.” Though their audience grew up on video mashups (MTV), it now also digests facts in tweet size doses.
Enter the Vid-Squid: a Willie Williams-designed four-legged contraption—which cost around $25 million, weighs 400 tons and is responsible for a harrowing carbon footprint—while offering a 360-degree vantage of U2 with its cylinder-shaped expandable screen and circular catwalk. It was a technical workhorse that solved the 360 problem and served the digital and audio needs of everyone in the house.
Here’s a video with more of what I mean: U2 on YouTube
How willing are you to Pivot and Reinvent? U2′s most beloved line in my book is “we are reapplying for the job of best rock band of all time.” In three decades, the band has continually morphed, synthesizing punk, glam rock, stadium anthem and mashups, without betraying their core audience. They’ve taken huge chances (Zoo Tour being a big one) that failed, and as I pointed out in a previous post, had the courage to keep reinventing.
A great example of this balls-out kind of courage came when MvK and I were discussing whether Bono indeed had a great voice or just a “people’s voice,” best-suited for sing-alongs or gospel choirs. Moments later, the band began a superb mashing up of an operatic aria into the greatly-meaningful song, “Miss Sarajevo.” With Luciano Pavarotti long since departed, we both wondered who would sing his part. No need; Bono literally channeled Pavarotti and hit every note with chilling brilliance – and in Italian. Not your average rockstar trick there. And extremely courageous.
Burma's msg, via Vid Squid
Point #2) Timeliness
How well do you use your leverage, when you have it? This means not wasting your moment in the spotlight, but using it to extend the franchise and transcend what just good product alone can’t deliver.
Arguably, U2’s moment has lasted quite longer than their two and a half hour concert mastery. For thirty years, the members of U2—as a band and individually—have collaborated with other musicians, artists, celebrities, and politicians to address issues concerning poverty, disease, and social injustice. (This list from Wiki)
In 1992, the band participated in the “Stop Sellafield” concert with Greenpeace during their Zoo TV tour. Events in Sarajevo during the Bosnian war inspired the song “Miss Sarajevo“, which premiered at a September 1995 Pavarotti and Friends show.
U2 and Bono’s social activism have not been without its critics. Several authors and activists who publish in politically-left journals such as CounterPunch have decried Bono’s support of political figures as well as his “essential paternalism.” I think recipients of their largesse would say “paternal me all you want.” Other news sources have generally questioned the efficacy of Bono’s campaign to relieve debt and provide assistance to Africa. Tax and development campaigners have also criticized the band’s move from Ireland to the Netherlands to reduce its tax bill. To which I — and they — say, ‘Yeah, and?”
Point #3) Local impact/ Global reach
KNOW your audience
It has to work first at home. Ask Starbucks. They spent YEARS in Seattle before taking their perfection on the road. So ask yourself… How well is your product received, adored, and used by the locals?
Bono started the evening by saying “We just want to thank Mr. Springsteen for letting us the hall tonight.” It was witty, humble, and got a roar from the crowd because it proved he was totally in tune with a bit of the locals. He thanked people from Conn-ect-i-cut, Penn-syl-vania, Jersey and New York for coming out on such a hot night, by Irish standards. And when he spied a sign in the crowd that said “For Clarence,” he stopped the show to let it be passed up onstage. He owned the locals.
And then he took it global like only U2 can.
Beautiful Day
He conjured up Commander Mark Kelly on the big screen via space satellite (OK, pre-recorded I later learned) to flip through poster boards of “Beautiful Day’s” lyrics.
His presence gave new meaning to the “Space Oddity” lyric, “Tell my wife, I love her very much, she knows,” which he quoted at the end of the song.
“Walk On” closed out the set with an emotional presentation by Amnesty International, as U2 fans piled onto the catwalk carrying large candles to remember the conflict taking place in Burma and the plight of the recently freed Burmese politician Aung San Suu Kyi, who also addressed the crowd from the expandable screen (above).
It’s a hard act for any little entrepreneur to follow, but this breadth and depth of action can certainly inspire some good work. U2’s efforts have effected change in Famine, Aids, War, National Debt, Political imprisonment, Pro Democracy, and preservation of music around the world. In my own samall way, I try to do what I love, and believe I have a better chance to make an impact as well.
Point #4) Respect, gratitude and humility
Thank others.
If it all works, don’t think it’s just because you’re good. I’ve had the honor to work with and hang around an awful lot of entrepreneurs that have met with some spectacular success.
The best of them recognize that, while they were good (like many others), they were also not strangers to luck and timing. Too many react by saying “that was fun, I want to do it again and again” … and then meet a hard fail. “Once in a lifetime” often means just that.
But U2 was none of that. I was struck by these sincere comments throughout the night:
“Thank you for giving us this wonderful life.” (For an entrepreneur that would be: thanks for letting me be an entrepreneur: it’s is hard, but great)
“Thank you for paying for this monstrosity.” (Entrepreneurs might thank investors for funding their new product launch)
“Thank you to our warm up band.” (Thanks to those that came before us in the innovation chain)
“Thank you Mr. Springsteen for letting us this hall.” (Thanks to the local expert that let us dabble in his warehouse)
So for everyone who thought I was just hanging out with MvK at a concert, taking pictures of mobs of people watching four men and a crazy stage production I say this: I was thinking!
For an entrepreneur, attempting to separate Work from the Rest is not only impossible, it’s a waste of kinetics and karma. As U2 have proven, we are One, with every ounce of our experience contributing to our creative output, bad or good.
Miles to go. Walk on.
~
PS: How to translate U2 in Entrepreneur
Meaning/Relevance: LISTEN to your damn market. Solve problems that really cause pain. Provide solutions that really are game changers.
Timeliness: Too late or too early is a loser. Being in the trend as it comes ashore is the only thing that works.
Local impact/ Global reach: Make it perfect for a small core group (or locals), but have the scalability to roll it out global.
Respect, gratitude and humility: When it works, it doesn’t just mean you’re hot sh*t and could repeat it. Act accordingly.
When Fast Company covered the concept recently, they called it “The Sharing Economy”. Now more light and more capital has begun to flow toward companies that are enabling the peer to peer trading that the web promised long ago. (Isn’t it funny how the web delivers, if you can afford to wait long enough)!
Rachel Botsman coined the term Collaborative Consumption ( or “CollCons”) and has written about it in “What’s Mine is Yours” . She’s become a bit of an evangelist for the power of sharing and consuming, peer to peer. Besides getting cred for the concept at TED , she’s been right on top of every move in the CollCons space. Like Getaround winning the battle of Tech Crunch. And Ashton Kutcher investing in AirBnB. Full disclosure: I have an investment in, and a deep belief for, the benefits of TrustCloud, mentioned below.
So what, if anything, is holding this movement back from breakout growth? Why can a neighbor lean over the fence and ask for something, but the online equivalent results in apprehension? When you hand the housekeys to a couchsurfer, leave the kids with the new sitter, or hitch a ride with three total unknowns, it’s not a natural feeling. I’ve written about it in my MadMen post, as well as the downside in my Catfish story. CollCons could be sooooo good if we could only enjoy the benefits of peer to peer –without that dollop of angst in the pit of our stomachs.
The antidote? Trust. It’s kind of the reverse of the behavior I blogged about in Race to the Bottom. And it’s closer to becoming a reality in the CollCons space. I’ve determined six qualities that can be measured and portable (to a variety of sites) and will help achieve the comfort levels needed to scale users and usage.
I’m Helpful: I contribute online; so I’ll be considerate and prepared as your host.
I’m Local: I grew up or lived here for a while, so I know the best places & activities around.
I’m a Connector: I’ve got many local friends, so I can introduce you to interesting folks.
I’m Worldly: I’ve travelled a lot, so I know what makes a good host in a variety of cultures.
I’m Authentic: I’m open about myself online, so the description about my product (self) is also genuine.
I’m Consistent: I’ve got an established history with school & work, so I’m a more responsible.
While some companies in the CollCons community are thinking of ways to develop this algorithm themselves, TrustCloud has begun to test its beta “Trust Indicator” integration in three CollCons leaders. The advantage to using the TrustCloud API is that CollCons brands will have a trust indicator with no development costs, the scores leverage the power of the entire CollCons network, and the scores are portable. [Unlike eBay Power Scores, with TrustCloud, good behavior on a shared room makes for good ratings in a ride share, etc.]
I’m deeply committed to “trust” in the real world, and I’m excited about its prospects to enable more peer to peer sharing online. But I’m also aware of how online behavior can be gamed and trust abused or never created. So I’m excited about the day when this artificial drag is finally removed from the CollCons market. Meanwhile, I’m jazzed to help all members work more effectively toward this goal.
That ouchie brought to you by Michael Arrington at a recent Tech Crunch Disrupt Conference.
It’s not as bad as it seems.
I find myself initially defensive at this comment, made by the headline grabbing (headline making!) founder of TechCrunch. I fall on the other side of thirty. If you check out this graph, which represents 300 responses from startups financed by Ron Conway, repeat founders under the age of 30 get more $500M+ exits.
So if this is true, are old(er) founders more cautious, prudent, and take earlier, cheaper exits for security? Possibly. Whereas a younger founder will let their company brew for a while, gaining value, or be more tolerant of the risk along the way.
Older founders have also likely seen the game played before, and know how to judge incremental success, while a younger buck is more likely to bet the farm. But what is most interesting to me is which of these personalities match best with todays “2 & 20″ VC dynamic, where small hits don’t clear their preference hurdles. If you need a moonshot to make a buck for your portfolio, by all means go find a kid.
Media mogul and best buddy Scott Carlin was in town this week and we went for all things Asian- dinner and discussion. I’ve been working on a JV in China for some time now, and as it winds its way near completion, my friends keep pointing out the cultural differences I’ll have to deal with. I’ve written about them before, but this week’s news certainly makes it worth level setting again.
So, for those that didn’t know it, one of Yahoo’s biggest assets on its book is AliPay. Which isn’t so interesting until someone from AliBaba says “by the way, you don’t own this anymore, and it happened a long time ago, but we can talk about it if you want… ok”?.
Looks like that just happened…
Yahoo, owner of the biggest U.S. Web portal, this week said it wasn’t informed until March 31 about an August 2010 transfer of Alipay equity to a vehicle outside of Alibaba in order to comply with restrictions on foreign ownership of payment services in China, which prompted the reorganization of Alipay, the nation’s biggest online payment service. For his part, Chairman Ma (seriously) said “the spinoff of the Alipay online payment business is “lawful” and “transparent,” after biggest shareholder Yahoo! Inc. claimed it wasn’t consulted on the transfer. “We are always committed to ensure our operations are 100 percent lawful,” Ma said today in Hong Kong. “The matter of Alipay is not settled yet” amid ongoing negotiations with Yahoo and Softbank Corp, Alibaba’s second-biggest shareholder, on the post-transfer commercial arrangements, Ma said. (Source: Bloomberg)
Yeah, I hope not.
Gone are the days of gunboat mercantilism, when British ships rings the harbors in defense of Jardine’s Opium trading. But Silicon Valley has weapons of their own now, not the least of which are direct flights to Hong Kong. I’m surprised Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz was not on a rocket to China the moment she heard the news. Rule of law in the US would have the transaction rescinded in an instant, and shareholder’s pallor cured shortly after. This one is going to play out a little longer, but the leverage is with Chairman Ma for the moment. CEO Bartz doesn’t look so good.
So what’s it mean. Well, China has some interesting ownership laws for one. And China has some fresh new perspectives on business leverage, ethics, and rule of law. But the economy is booming and the price of entry is to figure out ways to deal with a different culture. Really different. The dot.com bubble was similar in some ways. Hey, at least we’re fighting over technology these days, rather than water pipes.
I was in Deer Valley recently for a Pelion LP meeting and the topic turned to high- altitude climbing. Entrepreneurs that I work with know that I constantly use the experience as an analogly for building companies. (I have analogies for everything, some more crazy than others. At least, that’s what I’m told).
The basic premise is that, as you get to higher altitudes, your mind and body play tricks on you. Cognitive powers are altered. Moving carefully and deliberately is important, but so is having a guide to help you move quicker and avoid mis-steps. For a look into real-world mountain climbs, there’s a great book called Into Thin Air by Krakuer that covers it well. (and the rebuttal by Anatoly Bukareev is just as good). As for entrepreneurship, there are very few books about a company’s pending danger and death; most focus on reaching the top. I wrote a bit about that aspect in a prior post called Let ‘em Crash. I personally have been to what I define as” high altitude,” both in climbing and entrepreneurship. (Over 10,000 and over $100M+ in valuation, respectively.) Here’s a hairy story from one climb: entrepreneurs, see if you can pick out the analogie(s).
A trip to Peru brought me to the Machu Picchu lodge and my altitude adjustment was fully set, having begun the trip in Cusco at 11,000 feet. I had climbed Huana Picchu earlier that day, at dawn. I saw the most spectacular sunrise, as many Inca priests had before me (hint, these would be VC’s), and marveled at the symmetry of the Sun Gate and the other temples in the complex. I returned to the lodge for late breakfast. It was there we began talking about Cerro, the peak I had seen obscured by mist from Huana, with a giant flag fluttering at the top. I did some quick calculations and decided I could make it by sundown.
Cerro is the highest immediate peak above Macchu Pichu, but there’s nothing technical about it. Like most of the Inca trail, .ost of the path is carved rock. A little slippery at times, and occasionally requiring pull-ups, but mostly the climb is a mental one. I say this because the Urabumba River roars on three sides of the peak, and the drop is about 1,000m, sometimes straight. After a few thousand feet, the mist socked me in. All there was in front of me were stones, laid by Incas many hundreds of years ago, and vines. And the sound of the river. It became my navigation. As I heard it down and to my left, I knew I was on the west face; at it switched to my right, I knew I the path had traversed to the west. Half way up, I met two Japanese who were on descent. You alone?, they asked. Yup. Even that small exchange heartened me, not for the guidance, but for the fact someone else would know where I was on the mountain if things got bad. As it was, their estimate was a bit off.
Ninety minutes later, I came through a skree field of snakestone (awesome green stuff that looks like malachite, but softer) and arrived at a gate of carved rock. It was the first clue I was entering a holy place. From there, I experienced my closest-to-divine moment. The path became flat, and the mist enveloped my feet, such that only my footfall revealed the path in front of me. I was on the spine of the peak, so the sun, or what was left of it, made the way brighter. I noticed orchids, which grow wild at that altitude. And hummingbirds which fluttered around like some Natural History Museum display. Summit euphoria was taking over, as I heard the flag flapping in the wind in front of me. As I reached it I sat still for twenty minutes, precious time given the daylight. It was total peace. (Have you guessed? This is an exit!)
When I turned to go, I notice the river roaring about me not on my left or right, but on three sides. With the dimming sun, the mist, the flowers and birds it was truly heaven. The euphoria lasts through the first fifteen minutes of descent, as I passed markings I had made in my mind during the ascent. I allowed myself to gain momentum, feeling free, and frankly as good as a teenager in springtime. Then I mis-stepped. In an instant, I was hurtling down one side of the face, when I instinctively grabbed on of the vines hanging from the face. It caught me, and I quickly recovered, with not a small amount of briars — and a pulse suddenly 2x. I kept rolling, and reached the main Inca village by dusk.
Llamas get around without Merrils
At dinner that night back in Macchu Pichu, one of our guides, Juan —- asked if I had walked or crawled on the spine of Cerro. I told him, and he was surprised. Most people crawl, he said. The spine is only 2m wide, and the drop to the river there is about 800m on the right side, and 1,200m (4,000 feet) on the left. Well, I walked the whole thing… maybe leaning a bit to the right to compensate for the difference…
But the most interesting thing about that climb was what it taught me about the entrepreneurial climb: the height of the ascent is an optional objective… but the return is mandatory!
So said legendary financier J.P Morgan, who was an amazing creator of wealth and value. As the market for digital media has heated up, the question of founders and/or angels taking money off the table has heated up as well. There are at least two sides to the story, and I’ve lived them both.
On one side of the argument are the VC’s, who state that they want the Founders committed to building as large a company as possible. They reason that, if a Founder has 99.99% of his net worth in their deal, then his attention is undivided.
On the other side of the argument are the Founders, who’ve pretty much risked everything they have to start the business, or the angels, who risked a lot to grow it. Having cleared the horrible mortality hurdles (95% going toes-up within 36 months), they’ve arrived at a clearing in the Forest of Risk. A sunbeam of liquidity shines upon them, there for a blink of an eye. So its time to pay the mortgage and sock away some tuition with some of the stock, now worth 100x or 1,000x what they paid for it as Founders… or return to the dark Forest of Risk and wait for another sunbeam.
Not surprisingly, the best-known liquidity cases involve some of the hottest Web companies on the planet right now, like the daily deals services LivingSocial and Groupon. Half of LivingSocial’s newest $400 million round was used to purchase employee and early founder shares. Meanwhile, Groupon investors have twice returned money to founding investors and employees, including last April, when Digital Sky Technologies led a $135 million round, and again in January, when Groupon raised a staggering $950 million from eight firms, including DST. Indeed, a filing showed that just $377 million went to the company and that the rest was used for shareholder liquidity. More from PE Hub in an article titled Mercenary or Missionary?
Fred Wilson has written about it (it being a secondary for Etsy in this case) in his AVC column. His Union Square Ventures is one of many firms that have long given their blessing to entrepreneurs once they’ve achieved “something meaningful,” as he says. Ideally, “meaningful” means “more than [that they’ve just gotten] a product out into the market that lots of people are using but [also] built a business, a team, a revenue model – maybe even become profitable.”
Being both and entrepreneur and an angel, here’s where I come down on the thing: somewhere in between.
Entrepreneurs looking for seed-stage capital and thinking they’lll take 25% of the raise off the table are either selling into a tremendous bubble, sending wild red flags about their commitment, or both. But once a company has developed product, team, revenue and perhaps cash flow, the discussion shifts dramatically. No sane VC would walk into an LP meeting and say “I have 99% of our investable assets committed to one deal”, so asking entrepreneurs to tell their “Family LP’s” the same thing verges on hypocritical. Entrepreneurs actually become risk averse as their holdings become overweighted, provoking the exact opposite behavior that an investor would want. Likewise, allowing angels to recycle some of their funds allows them to invest in more early stage deals, which feeds the VC dealflow pipe.
Of course, this discussion is moot with 99% of angel investments, because they never get there. But for the lucky few entrepreneurs (and their angels) who build good businesses and have VC’s at the table for a secondary find themselves basking in the warm glow of a liquidity opportunity after a very long hike. It doesn’t last long, and turning back to the forest on an empty stomach can be a very cold, dark experience.
As the summer intern wave hits New York, I get my share of inquiries from very smart kids wanting to become VC’s.
And now I know, as Rodney Dangerfield once said, why tigers sometimes eat their young!
It’s that tough a world. Yes, I’ll be the first to tip my hat to some great VC successes (not much ink is wasted on the failures), and it makes a wonderful pickup line for Wedding Crashers. But being a VC today- or tomorrow- is way harder than it looks. First-time funds, no matter how much they raise, are basically start-ups under intense pressure to provide a preferred return to their investors before they get paid anything special. They have to be incredible consensus-builders within their firm to get anything approved. And the deals that everyone wants come with incredible competition from everyone else looking at the same thing. This is not a profession to wander into with stars in your eyes. If you do, expect your Share of Crashes.
According to a recent Cambridge Associates Study, short-term returns in 2010 were fine (based on data from nearly 1,300 funds raised between 1981 and 2010, U.S. venture capital rose from 6.4% at the end of Q2 2010 to 8.2% by the end of Q3 2010,). But venture is a long-term asset class. The median net return to VC fund investors has not been positive for any vintage year since 1998. Cambridge reports that 10-year returns fell from a miserable -4.2% to a downright horrid -4.64% over the relevant period. Five-year returns fell from 4.3% to 4.25%. Think about that for a moment: despite the past decade’s many hits (Google, YouTube, etc.), the typical VC fund has lost money for its limited partners. Even the top-quartile benchmarks over the past decade aren’t very impressive, with the best figure coming in at 5.59% for 2001 vintage funds.
I was a VC for a brief moment in time and it was fun, profitable — and nothing I would ever attempt to repeat. From 1997 to 2000, Capital Express, having failed to raise any big money like our competitors in the dot.com chase, had a measly $4M to invest. But we picked right (including an IPO that reached a $4 Billion valuation for a moment) and we exited with great timing, returning 100x. It was the top of the bubble. My partners were fantastic, our timing was fortuitous, but I know the difference between luck and skill, and believe me, as good as we thought we were, we were luckier than we will ever know.
Do not try this at home! Your results may vary depending on many circumstances. The mortality rate of VC’s and their funds is stunning. Thats why I now leave that work to smarter people, and wish them all the best. And I do that often because I see them practically everyday: in the past five years,Vaux’s companies like Cellufun, Operative, Mojiva and more have raised nearly $50M in capital from VCs. I sit on panels with them, across board tables from them, and see them constantly in subsequent fund raises for growing companies. They’re incredibly smart, ask great questions, usually have relevant and helpful operating experience, and work really hard. Yet, their fate lies with the luck and timing of a random world.
Is that a profession I would encourage a little cub to venture into? I respect VC’s, I just don’t encourage more of them.
And if they absolutely insist, I wish them all the luck.
Miles Spencer is a prolific angel investor, media entrepreneur and explorer. He is best known for his role as co-host and co-creator of MoneyHunt, a reality based show where entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to a panel of experts.
About Miles Spencer
Miles Spencer is a prolific angel investor, media entrepreneur and explorer. He is best known for his role as co-host and co-creator of MoneyHunt, a reality based show where entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to a panel of experts.
Comments