

Slow capital by Fred Wilson - stakent
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/10/slow-capital.html

======
BobbyH
Fred makes some great points here, but can venture capital truly be "slow
capital"?

It's my understanding that venture capital funds (the pools of money raised by
VC firms) typically have a fixed lifetime of 7-10 years
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_capital#Structure_of_th...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_capital#Structure_of_the_funds)).
Also, most VC investments don't occur in the first year the fund was raised,
further lowering the years required for liquidity.

This would seem to conflict with the idea that a VC firm can have "no set
timetable for getting liquid: slow capital is patient capital".

~~~
stakent
He tries to differentiate a his Union Square Ventures from other VC firms.

~~~
fredwilson
yes i do but Bobby makes a good point. all venture funds have a provision in
them that they can be extended and most are. i am still working on deals that
were done more than 10 years ago

~~~
pmjordan
That's interesting, thanks. Forgive my ignorance, but I'd assume it's up to
those who invested into the VC fund whether or not the fund is extended, not
the VC partners. What happens when they decide against it and there are still
privately owned companies in the fund's portfolio? Is ownership transferred
directly to the original investors, who can then choose to liquidate the
company or take control in some other way?

------
bonsaitree
I have the upmost respect for Mr. Wilson, but no technology-centric VC fund
with strategic investment goals in the sub-decade range could ever be
considered "slow capital" by the Buffett standard.

