
Kleiner Perkins Partner: If by Web 2.0, you mean companies that build an audience to be monetized by Google, I am not actively pursuing them. - joshwa
http://www.venturebeat.com/contributors/2007/01/03/with-web-20-its-easy-to-get-muddled/
======
zaidf
I think as much as Kleiner may not be interested in web2.0(or so they say),
many web2.0 entrepreneurs aren't interested in Kleiner either as much as they
previously used to be.

For example, in web2.0 world a 15mil exit is considered pretty nice. But for
Kleiner a 15mil acquisition of a portfolio company doesn't necessarily get
them jumping.

~~~
raganwald
I agree, my first thought was that how KP defines a _good investment_ is
somewhat orthogonal to how someone defines a good business.

You mentioned that a small exit is a home run for three guys in a room.
Likewise, three guys in a room can be financed by Visa and Mastercard, they
don't need KP.

~~~
zaidf
Yep, this interview told me more about the changes that VCs worldwide are
having to adapt to; learned very little about where web2.0 is and headed.

------
rebecca_d
Sitting out on the infancy of web 2.0 (Kleiner Perkins/Microsoft) if you don't
have eyeballs to appease (Google) makes heaps of sense. User-generated content
(I speak primarily of video as that is my research/startup focus) will be
history in many niches as more and more companies get into the business of
making excellent, interactive web video content. This superior content will
have many unique and unobtrusive ways to be monetized, and in none of the ways
(pre-roll, post-roll) ad companies are trying to fit to user-generated
content.

I think, as this natural evolution occurs, we will see the likes of Kleiner
Perkins and Microsoft bidding high and wide, as the next five years will be
very kind to professional content providers.

They are skeptical right now because they should be. The attention span of the
average web surfer is short as is his loyalty. A major content revolution is
about to occur and it will be fascinating to see who the major players will
be, and who (Youtube?) the major players won't be.

I am making a huge and possibly erroneous assumption that these early-stage
2.0 companies can't evolve into what I describe above. I base that assumption
on inflexible attachments to branding (hangover from advertising 1.0). Much
like a first impression, a brand is a difficult thing to change.

------
python_kiss
Earning off Google adsense is not a business, it is a hobby. Very few startups
manage to squeeze a reasonable profit off Google.

Advertising is, of course, a feasible business. But no one (this especially
applies to geeks) clicks on Adsense ads anymore because they are so used to
seeing them. My suggestion is to develop a custom ad delivery system, or
manually post sponsored ads (just as TechCrunch does).

------
pg
Not that I would defend the term, but that seems a straw man definition. In
fact, he has to take it back in his next response.

------
mukund
Instead a model that would help them reach people, casual surfers can be made
potential customers, educated customers would spread it around. This food
chain will make everyone happy. I dont know if it would go as planned but
still whats there to try :-)

So there is lot of money in getting small startup companies into advertising
and web 2.0 is just a beginning. If someone thinks google adsense is ultimate
product, there are flaws and once can correct this and still make ad revenue.

