Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

a16z.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 196 posts

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#71

Post by michaelchisari »

spotman wrote: post #50
oimaz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

zenefits, zenpayroll, slack were basically word of mouth

Zenefits and zenpayroll have easy to spot ads running on google right now. Most startup's spend an enormous amount on marketing to get any traction. I'm sure there is more examples like Slack that did not use much marketing, but they are very rare. If you build a startup and hope to iterate your way into being viral, this is bad planning in my opinion, no matter how awesome what your building is. Unfortunately, one t…

If you build a startup and hope to iterate your way into being viral

It's a great way to alert a much bigger competitor of an emerging market so they can eat your lunch, though.

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#72

Post by kamilszybalski »

"It’s Carlota Perez’s argument that technology is adopted on an S curve: the installation phase, the crash—because the technology isn’t ready yet—and then the deployment phase, when technology gets adopted by everyone and the real money gets made" - http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/18/tomorrows-advan...

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#73

Post by deciplex »

nostrademons wrote: post #12
michaelvkpdx wrote: post #4

My takeaway- the VC's have leveraged the money from their successes to create a vortex that sucks in money from consumers, into privately owned companies, back into VC pockets, and back into more companies that get more people to spend more money. The tech vortex that is sucking away quality of life from the middle class and padding the billionaires (and large company) bank accounts. Throwing out a few bones on occas…

That's the way capitalism has always worked - it is up to you to make deals that increase your overall level of happiness, and it's up to your counterparties to ensure that those deals also increase their happiness. In past years, instead of "VCs" the villains have been hedge funds, private equity, corporate raiders, giant conglerates, corporations in general, investment trusts, robber barons, and colonial empires. I…

> the average person values money for what it can do for them, while billionaires and large companies value money as a scorecard

I don't think you're right about billionaires and large companies, actually, but at any rate: the complaint here is not that massive, nearly record-setting levels of wealth disparity are unfair, or even that people are unhappy. If everyone is materially taken care of, it can be difficult to talk about fairness or happiness. What we're losing out on isn't fairness but self-determination - a democracy can't survive long if a fraction of a percent of the population controls half the wealth. Wealth may not literally equal power, but there is an exchange rate there and it stays pretty stable over time. If a concentration of wealth leads to a concentration of power, that will undermine a democracy which can only work if power is relatively more diffuse. We may be finding out the hard way that capitalism and democracy are not compatible, and if they aren't then so far capitalism appears to be winning.

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#74

Post by mkagenius »

chetanahuja wrote: post #42
ripberge wrote: post #19

When Andreesen talks about "tech funding", what do they mean by this? A lot of VC funding that used to go to "tech" companies is now going into much less profitable types of businesses that should not be considered "tech". Businesses that most VC's don't really have a lot of experience with. For example, their investments in Soylent, Walker and Co, Dollar Shave Club. It is REALLY hard to make money in these types of…

Bingo. A very large part of recent "tech" startup scene is just the good old "doing X but now with a smartphone" pattern. Or even worse "Sending a person with a smartphone to do X for you when you call them using your smartphone". I simply don't know how these businesses are supposed to be profitable at the scale they're supposed to grow to. Will Uber still be cool when it has a million quasi-employees? Will the gove…

> Will the governments around the world still allow the "quasi" part to stay intact at that scale - highly unlikely.

By the time that happens, Uber will be as big as google. They will find a way - when lot of smart people work together, they generally do.

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#75

Post by foobarqux »

oimaz wrote: post #43
spotman wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

would love to hear examples of successful startups that did not do any marketing. especially ones that are tech/Internet startups. also - while AWS can make infrastructure convenient to scale up, rarely is it cheaper. It certainly can feel cheaper in the beginning as its pay-as-you-go, but averaged out over N years it's not. AWS also has reserved pricing to aid with this, but most startups are not in a position to co…

zenefits, zenpayroll, slack were basically word of mouth

Zenefits has a massive sales team now, I don't know if it always did.

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#77

Post by vasilipupkin »

ThomPete wrote: post #34

As I have mentioned in another thread. We don't have a tech bubble we have a Silicon Valley valuation bubble, one a16z is part of themselves. The discussion isn't whether tech companies are under or overvalued, they are most likely in general undervalued. The discussion is whether the kind of investments that companies like a16z and other VC companies make are over valued or even valuable. In other words, they are se…

they made a number of specific points about why they don't think it's a bubble. Now, they could be wrong, but at least they are coherent

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#78

Post by vasilipupkin »

marincounty wrote: post #53
TTPrograms wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully gradual increase in interest rates will result in stabilization of stock value as people pull out for safer low-rate returns (which are basically non-existent now). Then again the fed sure is taking their time...

The average retail investor is still licking their wounds from 2008. Many, like myself, put our tiny blood soaked wads in CD's, at .01 percent. There are millions of Americans who can't gamble on a rigged stock market, and relied on a healthy 5% interest rate. This free money being doled out by the Fed to a select few entities will have consequences. My biggest fear is market will finally win over retail investors fr…

well, public markets have gone up dramatically since the trough in 2008/2009

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#79

Post by vasilipupkin »

foobarqux wrote: post #15

Lot's of points to dispute: Slides talk about S&P IT but no one is concerned with IT public market valuations (at least relative to the rest of the public market). The concern is with private tech market. Slides talk a lot about how the amount of funding is justifiable but the question is whether the valuations are. Lower amounts of funding do suggest there is less at risk, however. How do you reconcile slide 37, whi…

you can own an index of unicorns if you are an LP in a16z :)

Re: U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On?

#80

Post by abakker »

spitfire wrote: post #38
ripberge wrote: post #19

When Andreesen talks about "tech funding", what do they mean by this? A lot of VC funding that used to go to "tech" companies is now going into much less profitable types of businesses that should not be considered "tech". Businesses that most VC's don't really have a lot of experience with. For example, their investments in Soylent, Walker and Co, Dollar Shave Club. It is REALLY hard to make money in these types of…

If your business has a website, it is now a "tech" company. It's a brave new world.

Us consultants call this the "Digital Business Transformation"
Post reply on HN