I started my career as a finance reporter covering wonky subjects like banks, bonds and agribusiness. I ended up in Silicon Valley covering tech, because it was the late 1990s, and I was doing what finance reporters are supposed to do: Follow the money. I’ve since realized if you want to cover startups well, it’s more complicated than that: You have to distill between the pioneer money and the lemming money. By the time the lemming money is investing, the story has been told, and the pioneers have already picked their bets.
There are a few ways to do this. One is to poll the smarter VCs, but frequently they don’t want to share their secrets. Another is to look at relative increases in the percentage of capital going to different sectors. For instance, in the mid-2000s, sectors like Web 2.0 and clean tech weren’t getting the most venture capital, but they were getting the biggest percentage of increases in funding before Facebook was gracing every magazine cover and John Doerr was weeping over the environment at TED. A third way is to look at how the money shifts in a downturn. When a bubble bursts do formerly hot sectors turn into wastelands?
One reason I knew Silicon Valley would rise again after the 2000 crash was that it always does. Another was that the percentage of capital going to Valley companies increased, as VCs pulled closer to home and stopped speculating in more nouveau tech hot beds around the U.S. and overseas markets. But the exact opposite is happening this time around. According to new numbers by Dow Jones VentureSource, venture capital investment fell in the United States last year but rose in China, India and Israel despite increased economic and political turmoil in those regions; despite the human desire to nest in bad times; and despite the fact that so far VCs have struggled to get much in the way of returns from billions poured into India and China.
That should tell us something.
Sure, more money is still invested in the U.S.: But all three of my litmus tests support the theory that the pioneer money isn’t pulling back from overseas speculation in the wake of troubled times for the industry. The smart money is doubling down on emerging markets. Investing in unknown entrepreneurs in emerging markets is scary. But there’s a greater fear in venture capital these days: Where is the next new frontier to make big money?
We think of a VC’s job as investing in high tech—but really, it’s about investing in high growth. Doubling or tripling your money is great, but venture capital is at heart a home run business. And most of the sectors where VCs have traditionally gotten the biggest home runs have simply matured: Chips, computers, software, telecom, Internet. Sure, there’s still opportunity in the Web, software and even hardware—look at Facebook, Salesforce.com, and NComputing—but these are increasingly one-off and many of the most promising ventures sell before they get to home run levels.
There continues to be opportunities in biotech, too, but drug discovery takes a lot of money and a lot of time. Instead of swinging for the fences building the next Genentech, most VCs are content to find a novel drug candidate and license it to big pharma. That’s more a base hit than a home run. As for clean tech, the market is huge, but uncertainties around the science, government cooperation and expense of building a new alternative energy industry cast big doubts on just how lucrative returns will be.
Compare that to places like India, China and even Central Africa where incomes are rising, populations are growing and nearly everything is a growth industry. Trucking, logistics, coffee shops—and yes, some Internet and tech companies too. Sure, it’s fraught with its own risk, whether it’s ethical quandaries of whether to bribe public officials, language and cultural barriers, immature capital markets or just the grind of investing halfway around the world. But venture investors are supposed to take risk. They are supposed to be pioneers. If it were easy, there wouldn’t be the promise of 10x returns.
Venture capital judges itself on a ten-year cycle, and the riches of 1999 are about to fall off the index. The industry as a whole is in danger of performing about at the level of the S&P 500 or below. If it wants to survive, it’s time for a reboot: Get back to boutique, the way smart seed funds have done, or figure out global. Only a few firms will thrive in between.
Interestingly, the trend is happening at the same time the rank and file in the Valley seems to be coming down with a disturbing case of xenophobia. One of BusinessWeek’s most commented stories this week was about H-1B Visa fraud, and frankly, there were a lot of offensive anti-Asian views throughout the thread. Similarly, when I was on KQED’s Forum last month talking about layoffs in the Valley, a good many people called in angry that they’d been laid off while foreign-born engineers kept their jobs.
I know losing a job is scary, but a lot of the value of Silicon Valley has been built by people from other countries. Put another way: You had your job (and stock options) at companies like Google and PayPal because of foreign-born founders who came to the Valley and were able to thrive. We’d do well as a region to continue to invest in the smartest people from around the world, whether they’re coming to us or—gasp— we have to get on a plane and go to them. I believe the Valley will remain the hub of innovation, but for that to be the case, that hub needs to have far longer spokes.
Ten years after following the money brought me to Silicon Valley, increasingly following the smart money is taking me halfway around the world.
follow the money? you should rest couple of years at the minimum.
yeah that’s what my husband says
That’s what she said.
Sarah is hot – and smart. Pls chk out http://gf.tearn...cy-blogger.html
shit, you beat me to thats what she said!
Sarah Lacy is hot. Ping me girlfriend.
Nice story. Something Venturebeat–if it had better focus and management–should have written.
Future technology. Simple.
Earthcomber.
banks and bonds are ‘wonky’? no wonder we ended up in this economic clusterfuck
“You had your job (and stock options) at companies like Google and PayPal because of foreign-born founders who came to the Valley and were able to thrive. We’d do well as a region to continue to invest in the smartest people from around the world…” Well said.
It’s all love when there’s lots of money around. But when times get rough it’s quite often overlooked that foreign-born nationals helped make America what it is today.
This is an excellent article.
Especially as countries like US and UK shut their doors to immigrant, the talent that previously emigrated away will now stay at home and develop their skills.
I can definitely see this in India, where the amount of local entrepreneurial activity seems to have actually grown since the global downturn.
In this day and age, the connections and access to VC that Silicon Valley has provided in the past, are getting dimished in value. Yes they are still benefits, but nowhere as much as they were in the 80s and 90s.
Anjali Sen
(Delhi, India)
Sarah, Anjali:
So what do Silicon Valley VCs have that entrepreneurs in India and China really need? It seems to me that there is enough local money, talent (incl US-trained/educated), and market access/growth in these economies.
Are those entrepreneurs really desperate for that 30-year-old Harvard MBA to fly in and tell them how the world works? And if a US VC wins a deal there, did they necessarily overpay?
VCs are not just about money, it is about contacts,networks and the process.
Dear Investor,
IndiaGeni provides location based web and mobile services in various Indian languages like Hindi, Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, and Malayalam along with English.
Targeting 1.3 billion Indian users.
ppt deck :
http://www.scri...om-Presentation
we can set up a meeting or call at your convenience.
My current location : Sunnyvale, SFO, CA.
regards,
Chandra
I am not sure US VCs can bring that much to local companies except for money. Local entrepreneurs know the local markets a lot better than a US VC would. What a US VC can bring is greater access to US markets and partners. Depending on the type of business, this can be more or less important.
I would say from my experience that foreign VC investment in India and China is a very tough game. Local entrepreneurs are VERY smart and shrewd, and unfortunately, many foreign VCs still make too many investment decisions on whether they like the person or not. Unfortunately, the determination of whether they like a person or not often has more to do with command of English language and body mannerisms than real deep understanding or the local market.
Anjali Sen
Sarah congrats on your first post in TC. I read this article as a humble and sincere view (and somewhat historically deep) on the industry and the valley. Good to have people like you around that can provide that prespective. I also like when people rest a bit from posting on every change in facebook TOU or something like that and are writing something which is more deep and meaningful. I am happy you see things somewhat optimistically although its not very popular right now.
Best regards,
Mike
failed
yep..
Having you around must be embarrassing to the rest of the TechCrunch team. The quality of your output is so obviously head and shoulders above the rest of the articles I read on this site.
You echoed my thoughts! Great posts, Sarah.
like totally second that…I mean first article wonderful article!!!
All other bloggers on techcrunch PLEASE note
After learning about the secret history of Silicon valley
http://www.yout...h?v=hFSPHfZQpIQ
Not so sure if Silicon Valley can rise again without funding from government in Defense research.
OK, fair play Sarah – great article.
You might be the single poster that helps techcrunch through the month without Mike.
Inaccurate, boring, lame post this is not, makes a change!
Good Article. Very insightful!
Sorry but it is so untrue guys!
read into my company’s portfolio and see how many investments we’re into during the last couple of months. nobody is getting on his jet. NOW is the best time to actually invest and buy.
“NOW is the best time to actually invest and buy.”
Interesting, after reading “The Great Boom Ahead” by Harry Dent. He predicted in 1992 a great deflationary period starting in 2007 and lasting until 2016!
See chart on page 34.
The VCs are definitely looking more offshore. But as I said in my article http://blog.sta...-recession.html I believe a startup with the right stuff can still prosper here during the recession.
Marty Zwilling, Founder & CEO, Startup Professionals, Inc.
Pretty interesting article. What is your view on the rest of the world (not Us, not developing countries)?
as an unfair blanket statement, europe is tough. not a lot of culture of risk taking and very dis-advantageous labor laws. that said, a great company *can* come from anywhere. (skype saved my marriage when i was in africa earlier this month!) a good VC goes where it’s most likely.
Hey Sarah,
Regarding your comment below, you are very right about ‘labor laws’ in Europe, but there is a great VC culture in Europe, and actually there are currently still a lot of investments being done in e.g. Germany, by German but also ‘foreign’ VCs.
There is an index of investments here:
http://translat...cial%26hs%3DXVC
Great post.
Nicholas (www.twitter.com/nicholasmvh)
Dis-advantageous labor laws?
Laws like, paying a fair wage, treating workers with respect, more than 10 days off a year, enough time off a week that you actually have a life, equal pay regardless of race or sex…those kind of laws?
Yeah, hard to make a killing when you have to treat your employees fairly. Bummer
Very interesting thanks for the post
I had disappointing business dealings with Silicon Valley primarily because there was SO MUCH value that was NOT being realized. Not every company will generate a billion dollar pay day. Many valuable companies are 10 million dollar players. I think the VC’s are jumping on their jets in pursuit of big game rather than realizing the value in their currently stalled portfolio companies. There is an answer to those unrealized gains. Let’s start a discussion on how those businesses earn the value they have built.
Good post Sarah, are you in India now?
no, on my couch in pajamas in San Francisco. going to india in april. israel next month. you’re confusing me with om
When you make your way over to Israel, it would be great to meet with you! Shoot me an email if you’re interested (ask Erick).
nopes, no confusion there. I meant as ask whether you would also be following the VCs here for a story .
Sarah, thank you for this insightful post.
I’ve been reading TC for the last ~2 years. Spent the last 5 years at a Singapore-based media + web 2.0 venture that was profitable. I’ve been spending good amount of time in China for the last 6 years. I’ve seen the Chinese-made (Shenzhen’s Elitek) iPhone knock-off first-hand, which features 2 SIM slots and selling for 1200RMB. No, I don’t work for a VC. I’ll be spending March in several places in the U.S. Anyone interested in making a connection/meetup and first-hand information about China, send me email at com.gmail @ rexguo.
Yeah, it looks like she is in India.
Great article, Sarah. What’s a real journalist like you doing in a low class joint like this? Just (mostly) kidding!
Insightful article, thank you.
I love this product !
very nice article, its like the one of those in business week or forbes.
now i have a reason to come back to read full articles on TC, recently i used to read only titles and skip the rest.
Nice article other than brushing away the fraud aspect fo the H1B Visa program. I find it dis-tasteful to justify fraud with Google stock options or a claim for ethnic diversity in the workplace. You can have both without criminal behavior.
Excellent, insightful, useful article, Sarah.
Just goes to show that there are plenty of other great Valleys . . . in addition to Silicon Valley.
Thanks.
And we should continue to bring in hundreds of millions of illegal aliens and chamberpot immigrants so American businessmen will have the same opportunity to make use of a low wage peasantry as they have overseas, and foreign investors can benefit by investing in America when they know we have a labor force equal to that of China or India in wages. Patriotism is fine for suckers, but it’s about money.
which other valleys?
I consistently think that Sarah Lacy’s articles have well thought out theses, but need more concision. Perhaps they would benefit from less personal career history, and more focus on the facts that inform her arguments.
tip for darrell: just skip the first and last graph of each post.
Points for using ‘concision.’
Good vocab is always nice to read.
Agree. Interesting topic – though don’t really see much value in the career history or “journalism as a lens” stuff.
Sarah is right on!
Just to support her poitn of view, I’d state that Michael Bloomberg, the NYC Mayor has launched an innovative business incubator program with offshore links to few countries including the Middle East.
Ok I think much of what you have is correct. But how do you account for the fact that angel funds in the US now take a large portion of what was VC territory? What I have seen being raised in angel rounds looks a lot like what I used to see raised in series B rounds targeted to VC’s. Do you think it is just as likely that the VC’s are being forced oversees because that’s where large amounts of capital are harder to access, less of an angel environment and startups there may be of a more physical world nature than pure tech plays that you see in the valley?
i’ve actually written about that a great deal. i think angels- especially more organized angel funds- fall into the bucket of getting back to boutique roots. i think VCs have to do one or the other. economically–angels can invest less and still make a lot off acquisitions. in other words, they can get venture style returns off of what someone else would deem a “base hit.” it’s an adjacent but slightly different asset class within the asset class when it comes to making the math work.
Outstanding analysis, Sarah. It will be a pleasure to read your work in the weeks & months ahead.
Is there any particular country or region you feel is best-positioned to benefit from this flight of VC out of California?
Great article Sarah, and I agree with your ‘blanket statement’ about risk averse europeans. Red tape and labour laws – sometimes it seems nuts to be an entrepreneur here (Norway). You can bootstrap a company up to a certain level with a small group of partners contributing to the risk, but any further and you risk getting wiped out at first sight of a downturn. Average time of reducing costs (wages) are 3-6 months due to strict labour laws.
So rather than risk averse, perhaps the right term for europeans is risk realistic. You’d better be damn sure about your business model before investing in growing.
This is why you’ll see many traditional early stage VC players enter emerging markets and play more the role of private equity investor…. dumping money into things like infrastructure. Early stage non-body shop tech is still much scarier in emerging markets.
Great article,
I agree but still think there are many great investment opportunities here in North America.
Wow, that was like… real editorial content… hope you can keep this amount of attention to your posts… good job
Excellent article!! America has been pioneering innovation in the tech industry for the last few decades. Now some of the emerging countries like china, India etc are catching up and moving up the value chain. So its natural for VC’s to start placing their bets on emerging markets.
Toronto is the next capital hotspot.
We already have the talent, albeit foreign born too, but the diversity is already well established in our social system. private money is making it’s way slowly but surely.
Already some of the hottest startups this past year have been Canadians.
Not sure I agree. What’s your basis for this?
Might be the 4th biggest tech center in North America but the VC flow is weak and all too conservative, and a huge part of the tech is large enterprise-driven.
People associate Ottawa with the auto industry.
The auto industry is assoicated with economic trouble.
Therefore, Ottawa is too much trouble for VCs.
Who said anything about Ottawa?
VC’s are running away from Canada simply because of tax that is placed when a US company invest in Canada. Tax is high, legal cost is high, labor is high and not to mention the PR nightmare for Canadian companies to get some buzz in the Valley. In fact, even companies from Seattle, Denver and East Coast are struggling to get their share of buzz in the technology world.
Best advice given by a VC to foreigners or those from out of state – Move to the Valley.
Mike D – I can’t believe how many facts you got wrong in one short paragraph.
Tax on investors in Canada is same or lower than US. when you go state by state and consider all the taxes. Corporate tax is lower than US today and will be half of the US level in 5 years based on Federal Canadian government projections.
Legal cost is same or lower nominally and with exchange rate is much lower.
Labour cost runs 20 to 50 percent lower than US on market-to-market comparables.
PR buzz, well that’s a competitive advantage of the Valley. Duh.
I’ve done this analysis, benchmarking all these costs for large IT services companies and start-ups so I can back up what I’m saying.
Money is going into the citizen sector–Social Entrepreneurs around the world are getting all the money.
It has gained a lot of momentum in Silicon Valley, how come you did not mention it?
A couple books I recommend are:
1) How to change the world: Social Entrepreneurs and the power of new ideas
David Bornstein
2)The Power of Unreasonable People
Elkington & Hartigan
While I don’t agree with all your points, the quality of this post is far beyond what I typically see on Techcrunch. Well done Sarah.
Sarah,
I love your article. Great quality work. But don’t you think it’s kind of sad that for the US, investing in the smartest people around the world is considered “pioneering.” Not a criticism of your post. I think it’s accurate portrayal of VC – next to snow removal, probably the most locally oriented business in the world.
We tried to raise capital in the Valley, but it was tough. Before we could even pitch, we were told “why would I want to invest in a Canadian company.” Pioneering mindset, not. Sadly it is all too common. We did find some very high quality investors with a global mindset that have been invaluable to our venture.
i think the key is VC could be local before and do well and local is always easier. but it is sad. you’re also talking about a country where half of the congress doesn’t have a passport. yes, really.
Sarah, I would call this “The Modern Silk Route”. It looks like things are just coming a full cycle from where ancient traders, colonial powers used to trace and travel to India and eastern countries to tap their natural resources and richness.Even Columbus set out to reach India. Looks like even in modern times VCs realize the opportunities in these developing countries.
I think you’re right about the local opportunity first Sarah. I certainly acknowledge that.
Being from both countries up north, I personally know the pain entrepreneurs as well as VC go through when investing in a Canadian company.
1. Canada is a not a friendly country in terms of taxing venture funds. So both VC and entrepreneurs lose a lot of money to Ottawa. This nightmare doubles when there is an IPO or M&A
2. The legal cost is horrendous and not mention a lot of extra work dodging red tapes.
3. Getting talent in Canada is another nightmare because most of the talented ones are here in the US (better cost of living)
4. Chances of Canadian company being successful is somewhat low due to the lack of PR they get. This same sentiment is shared by other states in the US.
Now based on the above, the VC should have expanded his statement to –
“Why would I want to invest in a Canadian company….when I have to go through all the above and when I can potentially find another company doing the same thing right here locally”
@Sarah
For interest – if you think labor laws are unhelpful in some European countries, you might find it interesting talk to those employing people in China. China is, right now, copying those European countries in terms of labor law. It’s leading many companies to consider their position when it comes to further investment China.
If China doesn’t change this, it will become a problem for them in future in terms of venture capital and private equity investment, just as it has historically been a problem for some European countries.
hey simon-
interesting! i didn’t know that. there are a ton of pitfalls in china.
btw- i love when i learn from commenters! i can’t say that about a lot of blogs
(take that Time!)
“i love when i learn from commenters!”
I explored the notion of VCs “learning” from their blog commentators in:
Information vs. Judgment: A VC’s dilemma
http://countern...02/18/judgment/
Hi Sarah,
Great article as always, loved your book too.
Let me know if you plan on comming to Ireland anytime soon,
Regards,
Colin
Speaking of home runs, MA getting you to write for TC was a solid move.
Good post, I heard you on KQED’s Forum last month and thought you did an excellent job handling the xenophobe remarks that came in from various callers.
thanks for the post. also, just do your thing dont worry too much about WWAD.
The sycophants who do not want our country to enable the world’s smartest people to live and work here need to move.
This myopic view that jobs are here for Americans is anti-American.
Risking a move to a new country, finding a job in a high-risk environment like a start up is not for a comfortable citizen who whines that they should have a good job.
Anyone who works at a start up and mortgages their future to their own ambition is worth every cent and H-1B visa they earn!
Loved the article. Buenos Aires is up and coming as a web enterprise hub, many American and European companies make BA as their central South American HQ (Google being the most recent notorious). Sarah, keep these articles coming please !
Sarah,
If your angels and VCs are into wireless technologies but got burned or have yet to see the day in China or India , the Philippines could be a viable alternative. It has the same legal and democratic framework as that of the US; a young, upwardly mobile, globally competitive, english-speaking workforce; a growing middle class and a cultural affinity that Americans will find refreshing. And it could be their door to a market of 600 million: the ASEAN community.
This is worth a read:
http://berkeley.../04_immig.shtml
Gat a baby
Africa is tough! There’s a lot of international money flowing into Africa, but it just gets spread out amongst the cronies. I was on the plane recently flying between Johannesburg nd Cape Town and had the good fortune of sitting next to one of the new breed businessmen in South Africa. Without being cynical, he said that everyone isn’t looking to see what they can do with the money, but whether or not they can get some of it for themselves.
Yet there is so much potential. When process and infrastructure are so far behind, and they get an immediate (successful) cash injection, they can leap-frog decades forward – South Africa had commercial mobile broadband before the UK or US.
Certainly hope they’re winging their way this way…
…. “everyone isn’t looking to see what they can do with the money, but whether or not they can get some of it for themselves” –Unfortunately, this is a fact of life everywhere, even in the US.
A few months ago I interviewed a well known businessman and lecturer from Kenya at a [US] New England university. He expressed some opinions that really surprised me, related to the feelings of many Africans, who resent the attitude of foreigners attempting to “improve” their lives, living conditions, health, etc., believing that what they are trying to do is to change their culture.
This gentleman offered the example of “white people” building new, state-of-the-art hospitals in Kenya, which are abandoned [and looted] when they leave, even when the government receives enough money to keep them running for several years. Then, people living in the area go back to see their known and trusted “medicine men.”
Money would not change African countries’ ancient cultures –It would certainly end up in Swiss bank accounts and invested on luxury villas in the south of France…
Thanks for taking the time to comment Alistair. I agree – culture is important. We have a small tribe here, the Lemba, they can follow their traditions back to pre-Mesopotamia days – that’s impressive. Money that overruns culture is just badly thought out, and will get lost. But on the other hand, culture that refuses to improve lives – not in a western sense, but a basic needs sense – also needs to re-evaluated.
Your example of Kenyan hospital probably should’ve just made allowances for traditional healers and then it would’ve been fine: throw the bones and get X-Rays at the same time…
A VC could do incredibly well here with eco-friendly, low-cost housing. We have the space, the people, the sun, and the materials. UCT (University of Cape Town) has already had some success building on the Cape Flats with unusual materials for less than traditional building costs. Combine that with solar and wireless broadband and you’re doing something interesting – for those that want it. But, who out there doesn’t want a house, TV, phone, music, etc?
Great article.
Wow… I was floored… seeing a well researched good article here is rather refreshing. I have so gotten used to the low level, servings and unprofessional reporting that I was about to give up.
Lets hope arrington keeps his mouth shut and lets you do more.. it would be a win win situation, hope seeing more of you in the future….
This is a “nice” article for publications such as “BusinessWeek,”USNews,” “Wired,” “Cosmo” etc., even for the “Technology” section of the NYTimes, but not really for Techcrunch, because of few important details and too much of the writer’s opinions, assumptions and personal life. In other words, it is kind of soft-edged.
Techcrunch is changing, from an important info source for the IT industry, to providing this type of content for the public at large –”nothing wrong with it.” Perhaps this is intentional, considering that “the public at large” means more eyeballs and eventually more income from advertising.
As per another comment, TC is becoming part ot the mainstream media…
A disappointed reader from the valley.
hahaha-yeah cosmo writes about world finance all the time. funny, jeff.
Sarah, sarcasm aside, please do not take my comment personally: it is not about you, it is about changes TC is going through.
I could have included Robin Wauters’ articles, which are not up to par, for several reasons that are obvious to many TC readers…
i don’t take it personally. i *am* a businessweek writer. and i’m only here a few weeks filling in.
@Sarah — HeHeHe! — I wanted your reply, so I included “Cosmo” on purpose…
You mean filling in for Mike?
Sarah -
You wrote – “We think of a VC’s job as investing in high tech—but really, it’s about investing in high growth. ”
I agree 100%
The Venture Risk Investing industry is divided into 3 distinct groups: (1) Seed/Startup; (2) Traditional VC and (3) Exit
They are systemically, operationally and attitudinally different. They have different metrics for acceptance and success; funding, oversight, sourcing, profitability and, most importantly, infrastructure.
What is needed is a Public-Private For Profit dedicated effort to work with, support and compensate the Seed Infrastructure (Incubators, Economic Development Agencies, Tech Transfers). This infrastructure already exists and provides the efficient sourcing, screening and post-investment oversight needed to develop Series A worthy companies. What is needed is a dedicated effort that is not geographically constrained. What is needed is a thorough Virtual Incubation system that brings both Community and Collaboration to all elements of the total Investing community (Corporate/Government partners for “Validation”; Entrepreneurs & the VC/Corp Dev Community for follow on funding after the Seed/Startup stage).
What is needed is the Growth of companies and good jobs.
The Venture Capital stage of the Venture Risk Investing industry has a valuable place – to expand Seed/Startup companies with money, targeted managerial talent and business development/partnership assistance.
By dedicating a private/public collaboration to increasing the value and viability of early stage companies you are also increasing their valuation for their Series A round; thereby leveling the playing field with what will be a smaller group of Traditional VC funds.
This Seed dedicated effort can take two forms:
(1) Standalone Fund
(2) Operating Division of a Traditional VC Firm
Please review the powerpoint – The START Fund -
http://www.slid...rt-fund-feb2009
I look forward to all comments.
Thank you,
Elliott Dahan
Elliott@thegrowthgroup.com
Great Article –
Sarah, what do you (or anyone else) think about universities getting involved with funding (seed and angel phases) i.e. Stanford, MIT and others…?
I know it’s not millions but it helps.
SteveO,
Actually universities are way ahead of the game. They actually dump most of their money to VC’s and let VC’s handle the funding. So, to a certain extend, universities are the ones who are funding a lot of these startups.
http://en.wikip...es_by_endowment
Brilliant article. One of the best i’ve read on TC..