Note to self: If you ever publish something in the WSJ, make sure you get all the important stuff into first 2.5 paragraphs, before the paywall comes down and everyone stops reading.
If you search for the title of this article in Google News and click on the link there you can see the entire article without subscribing. (I'm guessing it's the referrer header that makes the difference.) Well worth the effort.
I love this bit:<p>"The first practitioners, including Eugene Kleiner and me, had familiarity with Wall Street operators and we set up our partnerships to avoid specifically problematic practices.<p>These parameters included: no leverage; audited statements; never investing personal capital where the partnership could or should do so (that is, no "cherry picking" at the investors expense); no profit participation until the investor's entire capital had been repaid; limited partnership life and no investments of new capital in older deals. These early ideas have become nearly universal over the decades. And in my opinion, they have kept our industry healthy, profitable and largely scandal-free.<p>It is time the venture industry is rewarded for the work that we do and how we go about doing it. We are not asking for bailout money or additional tax breaks. We simply want those in the Beltway to leave us alone and let us do our jobs—which means creating more jobs for our country."
It is time the venture industry is rewarded for the work that we do and how we go about doing it. We are not asking for bailout money or additional tax breaks. We simply want those in the Beltway to leave us alone and let us do our jobs, which means creating more jobs for our country.
One problem: there's a lot of crossover between investment banking and venture capital. Although the fact is appalling, it's easier to get a VC job with an IB gig and an MBA than with 4-10 years of experience in technology. So you have a lot of the same people.<p>VC would be a lot better-run, however, if it recruited technology people instead of ex-bankers.