Comments on: Venture Model Makeover & Diet Plan—Step Two http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/ Business + Technology in the Exponential Economy Sat, 11 Feb 2012 03:54:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Krassen Dimitrov kras http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-91102 Krassen Dimitrov kras Sun, 08 Nov 2009 22:55:06 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-91102 Azzouzi, What do you mean? Capital committed = fund size. Are you trying to say fees are only on called capital? Azzouzi,
What do you mean? Capital committed = fund size. Are you trying to say fees are only on called capital?

]]> By: Azzouzi http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-91099 Azzouzi Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:41:45 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-91099 As a VC manager, I just want to correct something brought in the article.The 2% of management fees are calculated on the committed funds,i.e, indexed on the amount of funds really invested.Which makes a big difference between 2% of the fund size and funds actually committed. As a VC manager, I just want to correct something brought in the article.The 2% of management fees are calculated on the committed funds,i.e, indexed on the amount of funds really invested.Which makes a big difference between 2% of the fund size and funds actually committed.

]]> By: The Park Paradigm - Wonderland. http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-87473 The Park Paradigm - Wonderland. Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:57:44 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-87473 [...] that allowed them to create the best returns net of management fees. Indeed this is exactly what Paul Kedrosky suggested the other day. (Once again perhaps we were too early!) We thought potential investors would love this. The [...] [...] that allowed them to create the best returns net of management fees. Indeed this is exactly what Paul Kedrosky suggested the other day. (Once again perhaps we were too early!) We thought potential investors would love this. The [...]

]]> By: Tim Rueth http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-86279 Tim Rueth Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:55:39 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-86279 VC fund terms have classically been "shoved down the throat" of the LP. I don't expect this will change unless a) GPs really do have to go down on bended knees to ask for $$, and b) large LPs read your article and say "Yah, you're right, this has to change." Oh, and keep the newbie MBAs out of the board room. VC fund terms have classically been “shoved down the throat” of the LP. I don’t expect this will change unless a) GPs really do have to go down on bended knees to ask for $$, and b) large LPs read your article and say “Yah, you’re right, this has to change.” Oh, and keep the newbie MBAs out of the board room.

]]> By: Four For Friday (9) — Shefaly Yogendra http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-86180 Four For Friday (9) — Shefaly Yogendra Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:01:09 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-86180 [...] Kedrosky writes about better alignment of limited partner and general partner interests in private equity. This is a two-fer for this article follows on from another article by Daphne [...] [...] Kedrosky writes about better alignment of limited partner and general partner interests in private equity. This is a two-fer for this article follows on from another article by Daphne [...]

]]> By: Krassen Dimitrov kr http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-86126 Krassen Dimitrov kr Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:16:26 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-86126 Stephen Kangas: quite contrary, I think. The MBAs will be turned off by the idea of having to perform for a living. they are mostly moochers whose only skill is to sell themsleves and to BS their way to a fat salary without having to deliver. Stephen Kangas:
quite contrary, I think. The MBAs will be turned off by the idea of having to perform for a living. they are mostly moochers whose only skill is to sell themsleves and to BS their way to a fat salary without having to deliver.

]]> By: Michael Elconin http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-86114 Michael Elconin Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:54:36 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-86114 Good article, Paul. On the face of it, a valid comparison is that VC's wouldn't fund a startup that paid is executives $400K annually on the theory that management should profit only when investors do. Stephen Kangas raises some valid concerns (that this model might mean VC's would be run by recent MBAs and financial types) but I predict this is an unlikely result simply because the limiteds won't buy it. What has really changed is supply and demand. Investors are in a position to call all shots. Good article, Paul. On the face of it, a valid comparison is that VC’s wouldn’t fund a startup that paid is executives $400K annually on the theory that management should profit only when investors do.

Stephen Kangas raises some valid concerns (that this model might mean VC’s would be run by recent MBAs and financial types) but I predict this is an unlikely result simply because the limiteds won’t buy it. What has really changed is supply and demand. Investors are in a position to call all shots.

]]> By: Stephen Kangas http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-86088 Stephen Kangas Thu, 08 Oct 2009 19:45:01 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-86088 Wow, well said, Paul! Long overdue change ideas. However, there is a potential sticking point: recruiting and retaining experienced entreprenurial talent as General Managers has historically been a real problem IMO, and that is particularly true today as I've witnessed some of the best ones I know bail out of VC firms, leaving the wheel spinning on deck or left to the new MBAs & big-co financial types who have little feel for what it really takes to help a new venture succeed. If/when these new ideas come to pass, it may mean that General Manager profiles have to migrate more toward those who love the work, have been successful as entrepreneurs, are accustomed to and enjoy the "high risk, high reward" compensation model, and/or want to "give back" to an industry that made them successful. I wonder what size of that type of talent pool can be drawn from? Wow, well said, Paul! Long overdue change ideas.
However, there is a potential sticking point: recruiting and retaining experienced entreprenurial talent as General Managers has historically been a real problem IMO, and that is particularly true today as I’ve witnessed some of the best ones I know bail out of VC firms, leaving the wheel spinning on deck or left to the new MBAs & big-co financial types who have little feel for what it really takes to help a new venture succeed. If/when these new ideas come to pass, it may mean that General Manager profiles have to migrate more toward those who love the work, have been successful as entrepreneurs, are accustomed to and enjoy the “high risk, high reward” compensation model, and/or want to “give back” to an industry that made them successful. I wonder what size of that type of talent pool can be drawn from?

]]> By: peHUB » peHUB First Read http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/10/08/venture-model-makeover-diet-plan-step-two/comment-page-1/#comment-86002 peHUB » peHUB First Read Thu, 08 Oct 2009 11:35:45 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=44859#comment-86002 [...] * Paul Kedrosky: Venture model makeover. [...] [...] * Paul Kedrosky: Venture model makeover. [...]

]]>