Yes - A boom implies the rising valuations are justified. In a bubble the rising prices are based on speculation and hysteria.<p>We are not in a tech bubble that resembles the dot-com days. There is a ton of money at the seed and early stage for untested ideas (Color) and many VCs and angels will lose money. But more entrepreneurs will get funded and that instinct to gamble is why America has such a terrific tech sector.
This is one of the best infographics I can remember. Really puts a lot of things in perspective that I had forgotten about from the 1999 bubble. CueCat?? AllAdvantage??? Doesn't even compare.
Like most writing on the subject, it seems the creator had an opinion on the subject and then created the presentation to persuade the reader it is correct. Which is quite normal in the field, of course, but when presented with a chart or graph a reader often believes that they're making up their own mind based on the raw data. In some cases this is true, but it is very easy to cherry pick only the data that supports your point - which is pretty clearly what the creator has done here. I'm not saying that means there is private tech asset bubble, but a bunch of pre-selected data points also doesn't prove there isn't.<p>It's really difficult to conclusively prove anything until you're looking back at the event. Until then there will always be two sides to the argument.
I am confused. The "Q2" on the x-axis makes it look like we're comparing half of a year's total to previous years' totals. My squishy human brain wants to put each point on equal footing.<p>Edit: I see, the graphs are continuous.