

VC funding continues record pace in third quarter - Sato
http://m.cnet.com/Article.rbml?nid=20119514&cid=null&bcid=&bid=-62

======
egiva
Somebody please explain to me how this headline completely contradicts another
HN headline (from the Wall Street Journal) that says the exact opposite:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3105596>

From what I can tell, the WSJ is blowing smoke by saying that current VC
funding is something like 76% lower than the 2000-2001 high - but this article
is saying that current spending over 9 quarters is still going up. Is this
correct? If so, I'd say that the WSJ is pulling feathers out of their ar$e
akin to "current spending is lower than the high from the 1890's - who cares
if this boom is more sustainable and less inflated than the tech bubble? For
once CNet is doing a better job than the WSJ.

~~~
Sato
TechCrunch tries to clarify the contradiction.

Web “Start-Ups” Hit Cash Crunch. Or Don’t, Depending On Whom You Ask.
[http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/12/web-start-ups-hit-cash-
crun...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/12/web-start-ups-hit-cash-crunch-or-
dont-depending-on-whom-you-ask/)

~~~
Sato
Follow up: Are the good times over (again) for startups?
[http://econsultancy.com/us/blog/8141-are-the-good-times-
over...](http://econsultancy.com/us/blog/8141-are-the-good-times-over-again-
for-startups)

