But what I think is interesting, as @patrickc points out, is the next layer where there may be the likes of Uber or Airbnb that just got squashed by regulation that we never heard about, or we conclude they killed some “unsafe” practice
-
-
And zero have a shot at a trillion.
-
Just saying this stuff isn’t obvious, especially when you compare across industries. Tech is especially capital-light. Not obvious $$$ threshold should be defined by (essentially) customary software VC round sizes.
-
Try to raise $100m for a company that wants to seek FDA approval and let me know how it goes
-
Not my thing. Just saying it’s not as clear as you make it. It probably should be easier to raise money for bio startups, though. This is arguably a defect of VC more than “regulations are broken” though.
-
It’s ridiculously, ridiculously hard for a company that needs FDA approval to win toneven raise a seed round
-
And yet folks manage to do so. Maybe the bar is higher for hacking bodies than web startups? Maybe that’s not obviously a bad thing? Anyway, just food for thought.
-
The difficulty raising capital for bio startups could also be a problem of impatient capital in inherently slower (vs web) industries. Not arguing either way, just offering something to consider.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.