“I must say that I find it remarkable that a set of investors whose professional existence is predicated on funding disruption and innovation are publicly advocating that an end-state in the venture capital industry has been reached; that no viable models exist, no innovations exist, no disruptions exist that will allow people to rewrite the venture rule book and add value.
There are no end-states, but rather constantly changing constraints that demand adaptation to ensure survival in the brave new …
…The context today is quite clear – and commented on by me here – surplus capital, relatively poor IPO market, and too many venture firms/people.
In the face of stark constraints, the challenge is to define an intellectually credible strategy for creating value that incorporates today’s realities rather than ignores them.
…My read is that firms will need to go earlier to avoid the ugly exit realities, or they will go abroad to leverage growth markets.
…Life is disruptive and all business people – operators and investors – need to constantly question their strategies and demand an intellectually credible answer to how to best compete given the exogenous variables at work in any given industry.
…While I have great respect for Sevin Rosen’s track record, I am not quite sure why going on CNBC to discuss the “broken” industry is a good idea.”