TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

So far, equity crowdfunding hasn't matched the hype

79 点作者 jackgavigan超过 8 年前

13 条评论

ChuckMcM超过 8 年前
This is just data that matches previously expressed intuition. There are literally millions of un- or under- funded ideas out there that want to be companies.<p>When you realize how much money the various public lotteries bring in every day, you can see that any idea that can skim off a nominal amount of &quot;disposable&quot; income from people who wish they were rich is going to do just that.<p>This is why I have always been opposed to loosening up the regulations around crowd funding investment. At least with a gizmo you get a gizmo, but for 99.9% of the people who have crowd-funded companies (according to the article, 1 in 1000 have been sold) do not have any return at all.<p>The part that annoys me is that it creates what is essentially a legitimate place for con artists to practice their skills, and enrich themselves, with no recourse for the investors. And as a result any &quot;good&quot; that might have come from allowing deserving companies to get access to a new pool of capital, you end up with a few bad apples enriching themselves and soiling the waters for everyone.
评论 #13293893 未加载
评论 #13294420 未加载
评论 #13293901 未加载
评论 #13296381 未加载
anton_tarasenko超过 8 年前
Lending Club almost went broke in the late 2000s when it experimented with real P2P lending. Defaults on the loans chosen by lenders went up, so Lending Club had to improve its underwriting model and effectively exclude the lender from the decision making process.<p>Equity crowdfunding is the same as P2P lending but more volatile (since equity is a claim on everything what&#x27;s left after paying everyone else). It&#x27;s harder than lending. And we haven&#x27;t seen successful examples of P2P lending yet.<p>Another thing is, we had crowdfunding in 1929. It turned out badly, so now we have the SEC and many restrictions on equity offerings.
评论 #13294174 未加载
api超过 8 年前
An adult can also go to a casino or buy lotto tickets, activities not only statistically guaranteed to be losers on average but designed intentionally to be so. At least startup crowdfunding might fund some cool stuff.<p>BTW why can&#x27;t VC funds be traded on the stock market? Seems like that might be a better way to allow public participation. You could buy some Sequoia, A16Z, etc. and let pros make actual picks.
评论 #13293987 未加载
评论 #13297195 未加载
评论 #13293942 未加载
评论 #13293895 未加载
评论 #13296145 未加载
tptacek超过 8 年前
I&#x27;ve written before on HN about why I think equity crowdfunding is structurally disadvantaged and generally a bad idea for consumer investing:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=9874468#9875770" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=9874468#9875770</a>
zby超过 8 年前
There is an information asymmetry between the investor and the executive. The traditional laws were designed to diminish that asymmetry - crowdfunding wants to workaround these laws to make starting companies easier - but it does nothing to address the problem of information asymmetry.<p>To be more concrete - it is very easy for the executive to extract value from the company - some of them are blocked by law, but most are about just slightly overpaying for something (most notably their own salary) - which will always be on the margin and impossible to control by laws.<p>Traditionally there are a few models for the investor to beat the asymmetry:<p>1. Become involved in the company - this can work only if you have a big stake in the company (with dispersed ownership you get collective action problems) and the company is a big stake of your activities (you cannot get involved much in many companies).<p>2. lend not buy equity (and require collateral etc)<p>3. The laws for public offerings - with all the strict accounting and other ways to information disclosure<p>4. Investing in startups. This is a small special case where investing can be something between becoming fully involved in the company operations and being a small shareholder of a public company. Startups goal is to grow a 100 times or die - so small continues extractions by the executives are ruled out.<p>I think most crowdfunder proponents think it should fit in 4 - but probably the difference between 4 and 1 is not that big.<p>Update: Just after posting this I realized that the information asymmetry is just one aspect of this - and it really is about principal-agent problem.
peternilson超过 8 年前
Of the few success stories listed they mention Camden Brewery getting bought for double the amount that online investors put in.. So the online investors got double their money as a payout? If that is the case I don&#x27;t even know how that count as a success. If investors knew at the time the potential payouts were something like 2:1 they should have stay well clear of that bet.
tlrobinson超过 8 年前
Well, yesterday I heard a radio ad for an IPO...<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.punchtvstudios.com&#x2F;index.php&#x2F;en&#x2F;punch-tv-studios-news&#x2F;120-punch-tv-studios-announces-50-million-raise-for-its-first-round-of-funding" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.punchtvstudios.com&#x2F;index.php&#x2F;en&#x2F;punch-tv-studios-...</a><p>Not sure that was an intended consequence of the JOBS Act.
评论 #13294421 未加载
mjohn超过 8 年前
&gt; Wool In The Gang, a supplier of knitting kits, was acquired for about the same price that investors put in; Crowdcube backers got a gift certificate in lieu of payment<p>This really surprised me, but it appears that investors had a choice between receiving cash or gift certificates worth more according to a Crowdcube blog post (<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.crowdcube.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;08&#x2F;30&#x2F;over-5-million-has-been-returned-to-investors&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.crowdcube.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;08&#x2F;30&#x2F;over-5-million-has-been...</a>):<p>&gt; Investors will receive their initial investment back plus a 5% return or a Wool and the Gang gift voucher, which would give them a 20% return on their investment.<p>Nonetheless 5% return on such a risky investment doesn&#x27;t seem great.
aminok超过 8 年前
While equity crowdfunding may not have matched the hype, technology crowdfunding where people provide capital in exchange for a cryptographic claim on a digital token that provides (or in the case of preorders, may or may not one day provide) functionality within a distributed blockchain-based platform, is exploding in Ethereum.
评论 #13295630 未加载
dominotw超过 8 年前
don&#x27;t you have to be an accredited investor [1]. I certainly don&#x27;t qualify to be one, i suspect lot of people don&#x27;t either.<p>1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Accredited_investor#United_States" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Accredited_investor#United_Sta...</a>
评论 #13294036 未加载
评论 #13294516 未加载
meddlepal超过 8 年前
Gambling with a more legitimate name.
评论 #13294303 未加载
samnwa超过 8 年前
The problem is that companies doing crowdfunding still have too much leverage. They set the valuation, the terms, etc. A 3rd party should set the valuation and it should likely be at a discount to traditional VCs.
richard___超过 8 年前
The less sketchy version of this is buying equity from the private market for startups that are already seeing big upward trends (e.g. Uber)
评论 #13296232 未加载