Comments on: The Entrepreneur Thesis http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/ Entrepreneur turned VC Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:49:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=5884 By: anonymous http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-4655 anonymous Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:36:57 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-4655 i've seen many cases where VC will tell me that i need to raise 5-10times more money. that i need to create THE market leader and a multi hundred million company, that with the technology we have it is possible.<br><br>The problem is for them it is a swing against the fence, they have a portfolio of investment so the strategy pay for them. But for me i believe a 20-30million company can be created but not a 100million $. after working 5 years without paying myself a salary and having spent all my savings, if at the end of the day i don't see a potential exit and reward for my works, i wouldn't feel motivated to work hard, and would just leave and start something else. i've seen many cases where VC will tell me that i need to raise 5-10times more money. that i need to create THE market leader and a multi hundred million company, that with the technology we have it is possible.

The problem is for them it is a swing against the fence, they have a portfolio of investment so the strategy pay for them. But for me i believe a 20-30million company can be created but not a 100million $. after working 5 years without paying myself a salary and having spent all my savings, if at the end of the day i don't see a potential exit and reward for my works, i wouldn't feel motivated to work hard, and would just leave and start something else.

]]> By: anonymous http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-9672 anonymous Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:36:57 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-9672 i've seen many cases where VC will tell me that i need to raise 5-10times more money. that i need to create THE market leader and a multi hundred million company, that with the technology we have it is possible.<br><br>The problem is for them it is a swing against the fence, they have a portfolio of investment so the strategy pay for them. But for me i believe a 20-30million company can be created but not a 100million $. after working 5 years without paying myself a salary and having spent all my savings, if at the end of the day i don't see a potential exit and reward for my works, i wouldn't feel motivated to work hard, and would just leave and start something else. i've seen many cases where VC will tell me that i need to raise 5-10times more money. that i need to create THE market leader and a multi hundred million company, that with the technology we have it is possible.

The problem is for them it is a swing against the fence, they have a portfolio of investment so the strategy pay for them. But for me i believe a 20-30million company can be created but not a 100million $. after working 5 years without paying myself a salary and having spent all my savings, if at the end of the day i don't see a potential exit and reward for my works, i wouldn't feel motivated to work hard, and would just leave and start something else.

]]> By: anonymous http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-4654 anonymous Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:36:57 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-4654 i've seen many cases where VC will tell me that i need to raise 5-10times more money. that i need to create THE market leader and a multi hundred million company, that with the technology we have it is possible.<br><br>The problem is for them it is a swing against the fence, they have a portfolio of investment so the strategy pay for them. But for me i believe a 20-30million company can be created but not a 100million $. after working 5 years without paying myself a salary and having spent all my savings, if at the end of the day i don't see a potential exit and reward for my works, i wouldn't feel motivated to work hard, and would just leave and start something else. i've seen many cases where VC will tell me that i need to raise 5-10times more money. that i need to create THE market leader and a multi hundred million company, that with the technology we have it is possible.

The problem is for them it is a swing against the fence, they have a portfolio of investment so the strategy pay for them. But for me i believe a 20-30million company can be created but not a 100million $. after working 5 years without paying myself a salary and having spent all my savings, if at the end of the day i don't see a potential exit and reward for my works, i wouldn't feel motivated to work hard, and would just leave and start something else.

]]> By: Richard Jordan http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-9673 Richard Jordan Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:27:05 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-9673 Mark, I don't know if you're still looking in to this older post, but you mention the problem of bigger VC firms not wanting to plump in "just" 2-3 million but pushing for a bigger round. How does one answer this question? If it's a firm I like, that will, I believe, be of great help to us? What do I say back to them? Mark, I don't know if you're still looking in to this older post, but you mention the problem of bigger VC firms not wanting to plump in “just” 2-3 million but pushing for a bigger round. How does one answer this question? If it's a firm I like, that will, I believe, be of great help to us? What do I say back to them?

]]> By: Richard Jordan http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-4653 Richard Jordan Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:27:05 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-4653 Mark, I don't know if you're still looking in to this older post, but you mention the problem of bigger VC firms not wanting to plump in "just" 2-3 million but pushing for a bigger round. How does one answer this question? If it's a firm I like, that will, I believe, be of great help to us? What do I say back to them? Mark, I don't know if you're still looking in to this older post, but you mention the problem of bigger VC firms not wanting to plump in “just” 2-3 million but pushing for a bigger round. How does one answer this question? If it's a firm I like, that will, I believe, be of great help to us? What do I say back to them?

]]> By: dongooding http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-9674 dongooding Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:03:15 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-9674 As someone who made the transition the other way (VC to entrepreneur), I both applaud your perspective and shake my head about how the more things change, the more things stay the same. I spent a decade with a pro-entrepreneur firm (Accel Partners), whose founding partners had been in the business a long time and so they shared the long view that you bring to the table. When I left (in 1997), I funded my own business, which has its pluses and minuses; it wasn't VC appropriate, so my own aversion to bringing in venture backers is moot. When my best friend started looking for VC for his business in '98, I helped guide him to entrepreneur-friendly backers when he also had interest from "replace the founders first" VCs. He grew into the job of CEO and earned backers a decent return on the far side of "telecom winter." The lead VC, true to form, made sure that preferences were modified in the acquisition to ensure that the full entrepreneurial team would be motivated and fairly compensated, rather than screwing entrepreneurs to maximize gain on that deal.<br><br>Roman Giverts' comment on Mint being acquired early by Intuit brings up an important subtlety that my friend's company also shows: it's not just "the founder" who is affected by the acquisition, it's the entire company. Sometimes founders may not have their interests aligned with the rest of the team, especially if it's obvious the founder won't continue post-acquisition. Taking the long view includes thinking about the entire company, since it's quite possible that future entrepreneurs are learning the ropes as junior management. Alignment of interests is not simple. As someone who made the transition the other way (VC to entrepreneur), I both applaud your perspective and shake my head about how the more things change, the more things stay the same. I spent a decade with a pro-entrepreneur firm (Accel Partners), whose founding partners had been in the business a long time and so they shared the long view that you bring to the table. When I left (in 1997), I funded my own business, which has its pluses and minuses; it wasn't VC appropriate, so my own aversion to bringing in venture backers is moot. When my best friend started looking for VC for his business in '98, I helped guide him to entrepreneur-friendly backers when he also had interest from “replace the founders first” VCs. He grew into the job of CEO and earned backers a decent return on the far side of “telecom winter.” The lead VC, true to form, made sure that preferences were modified in the acquisition to ensure that the full entrepreneurial team would be motivated and fairly compensated, rather than screwing entrepreneurs to maximize gain on that deal.

Roman Giverts' comment on Mint being acquired early by Intuit brings up an important subtlety that my friend's company also shows: it's not just “the founder” who is affected by the acquisition, it's the entire company. Sometimes founders may not have their interests aligned with the rest of the team, especially if it's obvious the founder won't continue post-acquisition. Taking the long view includes thinking about the entire company, since it's quite possible that future entrepreneurs are learning the ropes as junior management. Alignment of interests is not simple.

]]> By: dongooding http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-4652 dongooding Sun, 07 Mar 2010 14:03:15 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-4652 As someone who made the transition the other way (VC to entrepreneur), I both applaud your perspective and shake my head about how the more things change, the more things stay the same. I spent a decade with a pro-entrepreneur firm (Accel Partners), whose founding partners had been in the business a long time and so they shared the long view that you bring to the table. When I left (in 1997), I funded my own business, which has its pluses and minuses; it wasn't VC appropriate, so my own aversion to bringing in venture backers is moot. When my best friend started looking for VC for his business in '98, I helped guide him to entrepreneur-friendly backers when he also had interest from "replace the founders first" VCs. He grew into the job of CEO and earned backers a decent return on the far side of "telecom winter." The lead VC, true to form, made sure that preferences were modified in the acquisition to ensure that the full entrepreneurial team would be motivated and fairly compensated, rather than screwing entrepreneurs to maximize gain on that deal.<br><br>Roman Giverts' comment on Mint being acquired early by Intuit brings up an important subtlety that my friend's company also shows: it's not just "the founder" who is affected by the acquisition, it's the entire company. Sometimes founders may not have their interests aligned with the rest of the team, especially if it's obvious the founder won't continue post-acquisition. Taking the long view includes thinking about the entire company, since it's quite possible that future entrepreneurs are learning the ropes as junior management. Alignment of interests is not simple. As someone who made the transition the other way (VC to entrepreneur), I both applaud your perspective and shake my head about how the more things change, the more things stay the same. I spent a decade with a pro-entrepreneur firm (Accel Partners), whose founding partners had been in the business a long time and so they shared the long view that you bring to the table. When I left (in 1997), I funded my own business, which has its pluses and minuses; it wasn't VC appropriate, so my own aversion to bringing in venture backers is moot. When my best friend started looking for VC for his business in '98, I helped guide him to entrepreneur-friendly backers when he also had interest from “replace the founders first” VCs. He grew into the job of CEO and earned backers a decent return on the far side of “telecom winter.” The lead VC, true to form, made sure that preferences were modified in the acquisition to ensure that the full entrepreneurial team would be motivated and fairly compensated, rather than screwing entrepreneurs to maximize gain on that deal.

Roman Giverts' comment on Mint being acquired early by Intuit brings up an important subtlety that my friend's company also shows: it's not just “the founder” who is affected by the acquisition, it's the entire company. Sometimes founders may not have their interests aligned with the rest of the team, especially if it's obvious the founder won't continue post-acquisition. Taking the long view includes thinking about the entire company, since it's quite possible that future entrepreneurs are learning the ropes as junior management. Alignment of interests is not simple.

]]> By: PR Book For March | The Poosawantos Review http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-4651 PR Book For March | The Poosawantos Review Thu, 04 Mar 2010 19:31:48 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-4651 [...] The Entrepreneur Thesis [...] [...] The Entrepreneur Thesis [...]

]]> By: Mike Su http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-9685 Mike Su Wed, 03 Mar 2010 12:09:31 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-9685 LOL!!! Depending on Jim's intent, that's either the most clever comment ever on this blog, or the complete opposite. LOL!!! Depending on Jim's intent, that's either the most clever comment ever on this blog, or the complete opposite.

]]> By: Mike Su http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/03/01/the-entrepreneur-thesis/comment-page-3/#comment-4650 Mike Su Wed, 03 Mar 2010 06:09:31 +0000 http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=2022#comment-4650 LOL!!! Depending on Jim's intent, that's either the most clever comment ever on this blog, or the complete opposite. LOL!!! Depending on Jim's intent, that's either the most clever comment ever on this blog, or the complete opposite.

]]>