

Lead Investors, Dipshit Companies, and Funding Every Entrepreneur - cwan
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2010/07/lead-investors-dipshit-companies-and-funding-every-entrepreneur.html

======
pg
My prediction about leads going away was only for angel rounds. (The whole
talk was about angel rounds, since that's what the conference was about.)
Series A rounds will still have leads, so this wouldn't affect Fred.

~~~
epi0Bauqu
A hot startup doesn't need a lead because they are oversubscribed the second
they mention fundraising. Yet there are many, many others, especially first-
timers outside the valley, that face a much more uphill battle. In these
cases, I think a good lead can really benefit the startup. I've twice now led
deals where I essentially helped quickly line everything up such that we
closed in perhaps in 1/4 of the time that it would have otherwise taken.

~~~
csbartus
"hot startup ... they are oversubscribed the second they mention fundraising"

Is that so simple like in the nineties?

~~~
chc
I think it's almost a tautology. A hot startup is one that any investor would
want to be involved with, so obviously they can have their pick of investors.

------
csbartus
Dipshit Companies are those without a clear business model, or with a model
invisible for users: Facebook, Tumblr, Foursquare et all -- "Social web tools
which aid in the consumption of goods, or which are forms of consumption in
their own right" (via @danielleary)

Or taking a more in-depth look from Daniel Leary: "Now look at consumption-
services markets. Social web tools which aid in the consumption of goods, or
which are forms of consumption in their own right, represent absolute costs.
And if there’s anything we’ve learnt about absolute costs in the digital
world, it’s that people are unwilling to bear them. I don’t want to speculate
too much about why this may be. I will note that people are seemingly
unwilling to incur costs which they know are in place purely to generate
profit rather than to shoulder distribution and manufacturing outlays (as
admittedly unfair this is of consumers)."

These are the Dipshit Companies: taking heavy investment without letting to
know to their users how they will return, on behalf of whom they will generate
profit.

Educated users are watching carefully this current VC 'bubble' trying to
imagine themselves as VCs investing in Facebook and wondering why worth it
when users will never pay a penny to use it. And thus privacy concerns are
immediately raised.

Dipshit Companies are those which are selling our digital path behind our back
to invisible beneficiaries.

------
GBond
>I don't know what a dipshit company is. I haven't seen one. If you listen to
the chatter on the Techcrunch comment threads, you will see that people think
Twitter and Foursquare are dipshit companies.

This is insightful because we often overestimate even our own judgment
regarding a biz (as a user / as a potential founder) casting doubt. In
reality, luck (Shaq gives free marketing) and the markets play a big part in
determining success.

