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

Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

s3.documentcloud.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 83 posts

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#71

Post by finikytou »

polote wrote: post #24

I really struggle to believe all this thing. We have some inflation because of covid stimulus and Ukraine war, sure. So the fed is going to increase the rate, sure. And everyone is panicking at the same time so markets are falling. Poor people have less money because they need to pay for more expensive food but all the others still have money to invest, so I don't understand what it changes for vc ( except for the mo…

they want to create an event to what things will be in motion. a reset. it helps them clean their investments that will not work. usually there are two ways to do it. make someone else invest after your round or create a scenario in which it doesn't make sense for anyone to invest (except if you are an obvious winner with an amazing product). just as inflation is a buzzword that allows companies to mark up their price way more than they were before (but even when the inflation numbers were low or 1% I can garantee you that those companies products prices were increasing more than that. It is just that thanks to "inflation" they cant mark up to 10-20% now.) It is a scam and the looser as always will be the blue collar and the middle class.

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#72

Post by VinLucero »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #70
PheonixPharts wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're missing is the larger picture. Anyone paying attention in the industry knew in 2019, pre-pandemic, that something wasn't quite right. Companies were hiring way more people than they needed, growing way too fast, building products that didn't make sense, pivoting to increasingly user hostile products, etc. But it kept going because VC and other investor money just kept flowing in. Then pandemic hit. Everyo…

> This happened for what is in retrospect and obvious reason: Big name investors and VCs needed time to cash out. HUGE conspiracy theory here. Also, you are giving VCs too much credit. They're not super smart, with a few exceptions.

To be fair… the top VCs disproportionately have a winner take all outperformance, and it is arguable that those same top 5 institutions are on average “super smart” to maintain said position over the long run

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#73

Post by ithkuil »

randomsearch wrote: post #69
PheonixPharts wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're missing is the larger picture. Anyone paying attention in the industry knew in 2019, pre-pandemic, that something wasn't quite right. Companies were hiring way more people than they needed, growing way too fast, building products that didn't make sense, pivoting to increasingly user hostile products, etc. But it kept going because VC and other investor money just kept flowing in. Then pandemic hit. Everyo…

Agree except I had assumed the VCs were being opportunistic in unloading, rather than actually shaping policy. Do you have any evidence that they shaped it? Seems there were other significant reasons for stimulus programmes not just saving VCs.

This is a common mechanism that powers conspiracy theories: when you see an opportunist profiting from a situation, you may be tempted to conclude that they had to do shaping the situation in their favour, especially if these actors are a group of wealthy connected people. The police/justice system also uses "motive" as a strong requisite for bringing suspicion on a person; it's a quite engrained psychological mechanism (and often fits reality quite well, until it doesn't)

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#74

Post by TwoNineFive »

jonahbenton wrote: post #43

Not a finance person, just an adjacent technogist, but from having lived/worked through Black Monday, the 90s recession, the 2000 bust, the lean early oughts, and then the world ending 2008- for whatever reason this one feels like much-ado-about-nothing. If capital is not again issuing- not gushing, just issuing- in solid flows- by fall, I will be very surprised. Sure, some people were swimming in the deep water with…

I'm not quite old enough to remember Black Monday, but I remember all the rest. I have the exact same feeling. The 20% correction is already done.

When I saw that CryptoLand video last year I immediately through of the E-Trade monkey superbowl commercial.

However, there is still risk that could make this current situation last longer and be more painful than I think we anticipate. If corporations start laying off workers and/or if the general public gets spooked enough to stop spending, that could actually induce a deeper recession than I think you and I are currently expecting.

No doubt there is some short-term negative news coming out this summer. The question is what the sentiment will be like come early fall. I think that's when we will know how bad this is going to be. It might be over by then. Hopefully.

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#75

Post by guiambros »

ctvo wrote: post #30

This presentation is a great example of why slides are a horrible format. It's either too much or too little information per slide, context is lost if you're not in the room, and it allows escape hatches for handwaving at the charts without the ability to dive deeper or question the data.

I agree with you re: why slides are a terrible way to convey information, but in this case each slide has a page-long summary with their talking points. If you care to read, it's almost like being in the room with them.

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#76

Post by lobocinza »

Sylveste wrote: post #68
Apofis wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me thinks you're overstating it because you don't understand how VC's function. Venture Capitalists borrow money from Investment Bankers based on percentages. The market has lost all of its gains during the pandemic, that trend is still bearish. The risk percentages were adjusted, and now there's less money to go around. It's seriously basic math.

>The market has lost all of its gains during the pandemic No it hasn't. Not even close.

Have you taken inflation into account? Though also have to consider that growth stocks value also declined due to increasing interest rates.

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#77

Post by throwawaylinux »

bcassedy wrote: post #67
throwawaylinux wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could do. And a greed narrative gives (poor) cover for price hikes driven by any number of other things. Just stating these things does not help us get an understanding though. I want to know what changed. I'd be more inclined to believe the disruption from production to supply chains to storage and demand, migration, etc due to covid regulations (not just the Chinese lockdowns) to have had the major impact. But i…

I'm not saying none of those things are factors. I am saying that you can find quotes of executives talking about how great it is to raise prices right now. And plenty of evidence of profit increases substantially above inflation.

Sorry, "greed" simply doesn't explain anything. It's intellectually lazy. So is "you can find quotes...". Unless you actually have some evidence or reasoning that "greed" has increased somehow.

This has nothing to do with profit increasing faster than inflation which I'm not saying is false, mind you. Again, if you had a shred of evidence or logic to say prior to 2021 that corporations did not and would choose not to increase profit faster than inflation then that would be interesting.

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#78

Post by ctvo »

guiambros wrote: post #75
ctvo wrote: post #30

This presentation is a great example of why slides are a horrible format. It's either too much or too little information per slide, context is lost if you're not in the room, and it allows escape hatches for handwaving at the charts without the ability to dive deeper or question the data.

I agree with you re: why slides are a terrible way to convey information, but in this case each slide has a page-long summary with their talking points. If you care to read, it's almost like being in the room with them.

My comment about too much vs. too little information includes the bullet points outlining what the presenter said. For example, here's the entire slide on Adaptability:

"Adaptability"

> 1. Must be adaptable. “It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.”

It's too much information in some cases, that we assume will be verbally given (and then later members of the audience are expected to cross reference to dig deeper on), mixed with filler.

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#79

Post by dash2 »

iancmceachern wrote: post #53
dash2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin provides a “fiat” currency which doesn’t depend on any single actor controlling the supply. That could prevent inflation while being easier to exchange than gold.

Thank you, I appreciate it. I understand the vision, but argue it hasn't lived up to it. Anyone can walk into dozens of places in my city to buy, sell, exchange gold. There are many reputable online services for this as well. In reality it's really very easy to exchange. It's also way easier to deal with gold coins, etc Tham the whole crypto exchange/wallet/physical backup thing. People always mention theft, anyone w…

You might well be right - I'm not a Bitcoin investor or advocate. OTOH, while using gold for physical exchange in small amounts is workable, that breaks down when you get to large amounts. A million dollars of gold is about 20 kg. One hundred million dollars requires an armoured truck to transport. That's not a good way to do business. And indeed, we rarely see gold used for exchange. We rarely see bitcoin used either, but it happens - for example, criminals use it for ransom payment.

I'm not sure that FB or Google happened as quickly as you think, but in any case, there are less obvious issues with coordination. One person can start using Google. For BTC to be useful, many people have to start using it, and it might not be surprising that that takes a while, or starts among investors rather than ordinary Joes. It might not even be surprising that it starts with a huge amount of speculation - that doesn't prove the price won't settle down eventually.

Re: Adapting to Endure – Sequoia Capital [pdf]

#80

Post by bcassedy »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #77
bcassedy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying none of those things are factors. I am saying that you can find quotes of executives talking about how great it is to raise prices right now. And plenty of evidence of profit increases substantially above inflation.

Sorry, "greed" simply doesn't explain anything. It's intellectually lazy. So is "you can find quotes...". Unless you actually have some evidence or reasoning that "greed" has increased somehow. This has nothing to do with profit increasing faster than inflation which I'm not saying is false, mind you. Again, if you had a shred of evidence or logic to say prior to 2021 that corporations did not and would choose not to…

We're talking economics, there is very little evidence in general. The entire field is essentially observations and storytelling.

The evidence is profits increasing faster than inflation and examples of C-suites saying straight up that this environment is letting them raise prices.

The story is that when inflation is low, consumers are more intolerant of price hikes. They'll shop around and try out your competitors. Evidence to support this sentiment analysis is the myriad ways companies sneakily "hike" prices. Shrinkflation for example. When prices seem like they are going up on everything, what's the point of shopping around?

Post reply on HN