Andreessen Horowitz' public statements are a function of its road to profit. They don't necessarily reflect what will happen, as much as how much what might happen from making the statement alters Andreessen Horowitz financials.
Not that I'm any different, I too speak with assumed authority over matters which go to my bottom line.
The point I'm making is, don't assume this is some neutral-place observation of casual merit: this is a body whose very existence depends on alterning other peope's perception of investment and outcome.
For example, if it turned out a critical component of crypto was for some reason central london property (unlikely) I would assume the qui bono here was "when did A-H invest in London property, and why would it profit them to realize it's value now rather than later"
Not that I'm any different, I too speak with assumed authority over matters which go to my bottom line.
The point I'm making is, don't assume this is some neutral-place observation of casual merit: this is a body whose very existence depends on alterning other peope's perception of investment and outcome.
For example, if it turned out a critical component of crypto was for some reason central london property (unlikely) I would assume the qui bono here was "when did A-H invest in London property, and why would it profit them to realize it's value now rather than later"