My response to the January 27th New York Times article Venture Capital Blogs? They're About Anything But, by Matt Richtel.
Disclaimer: I am not nor do I pretend to be a VC and cannot accept any responsibility or liability for the improper operation of the site, article or reliance by any person on this site content.
The VC blog is not intended to give away the secret sauce and, those waiting to read about it will be waiting a looooooooong time.
Rather the VC blog is in its simplest context a self-marketing piece. So much of early stage investing is based upon 'chemistry'. An entrepreneur is given a gift via the VC blog; that is they are provided an invaluable insight into their potential investor, all in just a single serving while sitting at ones computer. Time spent reading a potential investors blog equates to untold meetings over coffee in solely the 'get to know you' column. Such personal get-to-know-you meetings would never happen, for counter to what the article implies these guys (and gals) are incredibly busy and focused people often working well beyond the normal business hours.
An entrepreneur armed with such intimate knowledge of who their potential investor is should be leveraged to the tilt when connecting, and potentially even function to ‘self-screen’ for potential chemistry, or even and perhaps equally if not more important, help determine if the VC invests in the space that an entrepreneur, who is seeking funding, is playing in. The blog enables both parties to save a lot of time and a lot of energy, and is the epitome of the interactivity of Web 2.0.
The more I examine it, Mr. Richtel may not have delved deep enough with his industry due diligence, and as a result failed to grasp a broader understanding of the VC industry, and concurrently has not effectively communicated what function the VC blog is and what it provides its readership.
Kindest regards,
Adam
Colorado Life Science Deal Flow
No comments:
Post a Comment