As I said - you evaluate what they pitched, not what you wish they’d pitched.
-
-
Incidentally, IMO, that is an exceedingly poor motto for VC. The best pitches get the big things right, but are often embarrassingly wrong on important details. Finding the wrong thing is not how you make your money.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
That is not at all what I said.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I believe you said, evaluate what is pitched, not what you would like to have had pitched. I don't think that's wrong, but it's incomplete. You can't project your vision, but you can and should focus primarily on the big ideas. The big idea here is not emptying your home screen.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
The pitch doesn’t have to be perfect. But you can’t come out of the pitch and say ‘that was a terrible answer, but they should have said X and then it would have been great’ - and then invest as though they HAD said X.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
It’s a campaign proposal (not a VC pitch). a stake in the ground on a big q to show voters her priorities, and, secondarily, to spur convo. Could any campaign proposal meet the level of detail you want to see? Details are for the legislative process w Congress, not on a campaign.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TJSheth @benedictevans and
It seems you do not agree w the first order contention that what amazon is doing is a problem. That’s fine- but then why are you focused on the second order detail questions about what action to take?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
because the detail is what is proposed, and it is full of embarrassing errors.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Putting aside what we should do about it, what is your view on the first question: is amazon selling its own products on its marketplace problematic?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Ipso facto? No. Or, if it is, then we should apply the same rule to every other large retailer, since every large retailer has been doing exactly the same thing for the last 150 years. Either way, you need a thesis for WHY it’s bad (and for whom), not an assertion.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Did you read @Alex_Danco’s thing that @rabois shared? He’s alluding to a change in degree being a change in kind because of the level of data that Amazon has relative to prior generations of retailers.
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.