,
10 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Sorry, something about this is stuck in my craw.
I don’t know @chamath, and TBH he comes off as a bit of a d-bag, but dunking on him for the changes he’s making at SC without looking at the substance of “why” is an unfortunately easy oversight.
I don’t know @chamath, and TBH he comes off as a bit of a d-bag, but dunking on him for the changes he’s making at SC without looking at the substance of “why” is an unfortunately easy oversight.
Sure, gossip and scandal drive clicks but did anyone read the annual letter? Once you get past the obnoxious chest pounding and the whole “heir to Berkshire” BS, there’s a substantive critique of the state of startups that deserves attention and reflection s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/socialcapital-…
The Shuffle Game section is of particular note 
Broader venture has been an underperforming asset for well over a decade. @KauffmanFDN’s seminal report is worth a read: dianemulcahy.com/we-have-met-th…
Yet there is little incentive for anyone (founder, GP or LP) to critique or try and affect change within the current structure. So we accept, whole cloth, that there’s one model for funding and scaling startups.
Because it’s working *enough*.
.07% of venture funded companies achieve unicorn status. Which is significant in that these are the companies that drive returns for the whole industry.
How would the average startup fare if their product worked for only .07% of their customers?
.07% of venture funded companies achieve unicorn status. Which is significant in that these are the companies that drive returns for the whole industry.
How would the average startup fare if their product worked for only .07% of their customers?
That scale and impact of those .07% covers a lot sins and flaws and holes in the venture business model.
Seeing the reaction to someone questioning incentives AND doing something structurally about it is disappointing.
Most do nothing but play the game that’s on the field.
Seeing the reaction to someone questioning incentives AND doing something structurally about it is disappointing.
Most do nothing but play the game that’s on the field.
So, sure, SC is dealing with some short term consequences of a seismic shift to their business model.
But look past the drama and there’s something worthy of brining to light.
Worthy of a conversation in the open, as it’s been going on behind closed doors for far too long.
But look past the drama and there’s something worthy of brining to light.
Worthy of a conversation in the open, as it’s been going on behind closed doors for far too long.
Ok, got that out of my craw.
Again, @chamath may be a megalomaniacal d-bag (🤷🏻♂️) but bundling him with a serial sexual harasser and a murderous regime for making attempts to right some of the wrongs he sees in the VC business is more fuel for people to maintain the status quo.
Again, @chamath may be a megalomaniacal d-bag (🤷🏻♂️) but bundling him with a serial sexual harasser and a murderous regime for making attempts to right some of the wrongs he sees in the VC business is more fuel for people to maintain the status quo.
We need more questioning, more new funding models, and more incentives to question conventional wisdom.
If we’re ever going to unlock the next .07% of world changing startups.
We need more of this, not less.
If we’re ever going to unlock the next .07% of world changing startups.
We need more of this, not less.
