by cHalgan on 9/13/11, 6:02 AM with 12 comments
by larrys on 9/13/11, 1:59 PM
Because by being a VC not only is someone else doing the work but you are spreading around risk over many possibilities rather then investing years in 1 idea you have.
And of course it makes sense which is why many successful entrepreneurs after their one or two hit wonders go into investing and don't start another risky business. They only need 1 hit to stay on top and can have many failures in the ideas they invest in.
by ma2rten on 9/13/11, 10:01 AM
Is that really the case ?
by michaelochurch on 9/13/11, 11:22 AM
Leone called the shift a thankful one, explaining that if you want a founder to serve as the VP of product or in a very important technical role or as the CEO, it’s possible to have such conversations, whereas it’s “different conversation” with a 45-year-old founder who’s “bent on being CEO.”
Read: We'd rather fund a young person who's thankful just to get funding and doesn't know his rights, because it's easier to ask for onerous terms and to boot him later.
by nirvana on 9/13/11, 11:12 AM
Then, if you make some good investments, your firm gets a cut of the returns, plus being on boards often results in stock options in the company, etc. etc.
It seems to me that being a VC is the catbird seat of leverage. You invest other people's money and get a cut of the results.