

Paul Buchheit’s lucky streak as an angel (and a founder)  - prakash
http://deals.venturebeat.com/2010/02/18/buchheit/

======
hop
Lucky streak? Sounds like he had a hand in shaping all those companies and he
knows the people at Google doing the acquisitions. He created Gmail. He's a
technical expert putting his money to work in businesses he understands and
can help grow.

~~~
dtby
As a former professional poker player and sports bettor (who now works on the
'other side'), I looked at the headline in a different way.

There is an appropriate level of failure in all endeavors which involve risk.
If you are winning 100% of your hands which make it to showdown, you are
either on a real lucky streak.. or you're not going to showdown often enough.
That is to say, you're leaving money on the table in terms of potential profit
from hands which are not guaranteed winners.

So, I read the headline as a more polite way of saying that he is cherry-
picking only the very best opportunities available to him. I'm not in a
position to say one way or another whether that is appropriate to his
investment goals.

~~~
hop
_you are either on a real lucky streak.. or you're not going to showdown often
enough..._

People used to say similar things in Warren Buffett's early days - that he was
either super lucky or wasn't leveraging himself enough to multiply his
investment prowness. Now he's one of the richest men in the world.

And like Buffet, Paul isn't throwing darts at a roulette wheel, hoping for a
winner. He is deeply involved in helping build these companies. He's a
technical genius that hedges his bets. He can give access to his friends like
PG or the Google founders. If making a poker analogy, paul would be the player
with x-ray vision, knowing where and when to bet or fold.

~~~
DaniFong
That's a good point. Almost everyone will play the leverage game once it gets
popular: this means that opportunities for the kind of statistical arbitrage
people like mellow out, and what's more the whole stock market will be so
highly inter-networked that the short term stock price will be fragile. But
through judicious investment and directorship one's illiquid investments -- as
Berkshire Hathaway tends to make them, can be multiplied far more profoundly
than traditional leveraged investment. In this way B.H. operates more like
private equity or a venture firm -- what's amazing is the difference in scale.

Incidentally, I worked out the same numbers for my own financial situation. It
doesn't make a lick of sense for me to save up and diversify at this point, or
even actively invest to chase the best return I can, not now. All of my money
and effort should go back into my startup, so that I achieve profitability
there, and liquidity.

------
DaniFong
'When I was living in Italy, I was once trying to tell someone that I hadn't
had much success in doing something, but I couldn't think of the Italian word
for success. I spent some time trying to describe the word I meant. Finally
she said "Ah! Fortuna!"'

\-- pg

------
dschobel
He's playing the game at a whole other level. With his intelligence and
connections in SV, I don't think calling it luck does it justice.

I'm still waiting for him to start a hedge fund so that non-connected SV-
outsiders can get in on his action.

~~~
seiji
It's an interesting model: work on something for a while to show people what
you can do, convince friends in high places they want you (back), get
"acquired" and EOL what you spent six months to two years working on.

    
    
      Appjet = left google -> appjet -> google acquisition.
      reMail = left google -> xobni -> remail -> google acquisition.
      FriendFeed = left google -> friendfeed -> acquisition by friends at facebook.
    

(It's not just a "web" thing -- check out some Cisco acquisition cycles from
people who leave, create new products, then get acquired back again. I think
most Cisco Family acquisitions involve actually keeping the products they
acquire though.)

~~~
dschobel
Sure, but it's predicated on doing good work. If Paul didn't kick ass @
google, no one would have followed his work after he left. If he hadn't built
something awesome after he left, they wouldn't have asked for him to come
back.

Skill is the common denominator to all of his good fortune.

~~~
neilc
However, there might be some truth to the idea that Google alumni seem to be
more successful at subsequent startups than alumni of, say, Microsoft, Amazon,
or Sun.

~~~
starkfist
Paypal has the most successful alumni network in the valley.

~~~
neilc
Right -- at least on a per-capita basis, anyway.

Zuckerberg made an interesting comment at this year's startup school, when he
said that he explicitly wanted Facebook to be a "a great place to be _from_ "
-- i.e. FB wants to be a good company where you can learn for a few years, and
then go off and start your own venture to apply what you've learned. I thought
it was refreshing to hear a CEO recognize and embrace that working for his
company might only be one step in someone's career.

------
joshu
Completely aside, this article lists only his successes, so it presents a
biased view.

Edit: changed prevents to presents.

~~~
apu
prevents -> presents?

(Normally I try not to nitpick, but in this case it might completely flip the
meaning of what you're saying.)

~~~
joshu
Fixed. Thank you!

------
jedc
As I understand it, being "lucky" as an angel involves (in the first place)
quality deal flow. With Paul's background I would bet he's got _incredible_
deal flow.

(There are a lot of other things too, I'm sure, but this is a big one.)

------
mgrouchy
Its like they say, the harder you work, the luckier you get.

