261–270 of 394 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Small point: Your Jets Eagles analogy is really opaque. I'm still not even sure if you realize they both wear green jerseys. (I assume that was the point, but it's most unclear.)
MY VENEER OF FOOTBALL CREDIBILITY. IT'S RUINED! (I know that rivalry from the Patton Oswalt movie).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is untrue, but often assumed. Total iOS devices: 315M (as of 2012-03-07) Total Andriod devices: 300M (as of 2012-02-29) http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/07/tim-cook-talks-ios-device-s... http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2012/feb/29/an... Android is selling faster, but it has yet to have a larger installed base. It will likely happen soon, but iOS had a large lead in terms of start time and the iPad is…
tptacek's point was about profits, not install based.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are just seeing the good cases here. A 10X return on any one investment pays for all the bad investments. If I remember correctly, the return that Sequoia got on their YouTube investment paid for the entire portfolio many times over. But more importantly than that, I think it was one of a very few that were good in that fund. I believe that particular fund was particularly bad because it contained remnants of the…
You need some serious perspective, they just got 2x return in a few months. They can, I don't know, re-invest the money perhaps? And you're cherry picking out one of many Sequoia funds (and still a successful one at that) to point at to call VC life hard? A dot-com period fund as well? How many other hit funds have they had? Sequoia estimates that 19% of the NASDAQ’s value is made up of firms they have funded.
Some quick back-of-the-envelope math for how much the co-founders walked away with. Assuming the first round of $500K was @ $2.5M valuation, giving those investors 20%. So the founders are left with 80%. Further assume the 2nd round of $7M @ $20M valuation, giving those investors 35%. So the founders are left with 45%. Further assume the 3rd round of $40M @ $500M valuation, giving those investors 8%. So the founders…
You are not accounting for liquidation preference correctly. When someone gets a 1x liquidation preference first they get their money back, then they get an equal portion to what is left . So in the case of the 3rd round, first they got their $40M back, but they retained 8% of the pool. Same with the 7M etc. Call it $50M off the billion right off the bat, leaving 950 million. Doesn't really dent the number (reduction…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
MY VENEER OF FOOTBALL CREDIBILITY. IT'S RUINED! (I know that rivalry from the Patton Oswalt movie).
Oh, in that case, confusing the Jets and Giants will really ruin your credibility. The analogy makes a lot more sense substituting Giants.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tptacek's point was about profits, not install based.
He's saying that I'm not only right about profits, but Apple still has a slim edge on installations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I read the headline I thought two things: a) Wow, the Instagram guys deserve it, congrats to them. b) I need to delete my account. The second point is because I have been actively trying to avoid giving fb more data than absolutely necessary. No ill will towards Instagram.
Yes. I JUST deleted (deactivated/request removal) my FaceBook account over the weekend.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are just seeing the good cases here. A 10X return on any one investment pays for all the bad investments. If I remember correctly, the return that Sequoia got on their YouTube investment paid for the entire portfolio many times over. But more importantly than that, I think it was one of a very few that were good in that fund. I believe that particular fund was particularly bad because it contained remnants of the…
You need some serious perspective, they just got 2x return in a few months. They can, I don't know, re-invest the money perhaps? And you're cherry picking out one of many Sequoia funds (and still a successful one at that) to point at to call VC life hard? A dot-com period fund as well? How many other hit funds have they had? Sequoia estimates that 19% of the NASDAQ’s value is made up of firms they have funded.
I recommend checking out the book 'Venture Deals' by Brad Feld and Jason Mendelson. They explain the various structures of funds, why they're structured that way, and how it influences the decisions the investors make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you joking? You don't think a 100% gain is good for a 1-2 month timeframe? The most successful hedge funds in the world have money thrown at them if they can average 50% gains over the course of a year. And that is an outstanding year! I realize the economics of hedge funds and VC funds are different in that VC's take a shotgun approach and hope that one out of ten investments makes up for all the losers, but on…
> if they can average 50% gains over the course of a year That's the point, this isn't what happened. Given the choice between 2x return in 2 months or 10x return in 120 months, there's no contest at all. That initial investment that returned 2x is now out of play for the life of the fund. If the fund's life is 10 years, the return is 1.1x, not 2x.