People are surprised that a bogus product was funded for $120 million, not that it was created. Plenty of trash that gets under $1 mil.
-
-
-
In that case their surprise comes from misunderstanding that it's companies, not individual products, that VCs fund.
-
VCs fund cos -> cos develop products -> so by providing $$ your'e encouraging them to create a prod. I'm sure VC dont blindly give them $$$.
-
2/ and so if you may argue, cos are a good proxy of what prod. they might create.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm never surprised when startups sell bogus products. But usually I'm disappointed when people buy them.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
if paul graham funded a gig & they sold a bogus product, I might feel surprised or betrayed,no? Its really abt who's funding them
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yeah, when the East coast is stupid or malicious everyone's just like "whadya expect?" SV is actually kinda supposed to be excellent to all
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If they start with an idea (not a prototype) the sales pitch can get ahead of the laws of physics and markets. Operational VCs should filter
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Theranos
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Actually i'm not sure it's flattering, could mean that startups aren't working on ambitious enough ideas
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Bogus product like
@juicero ?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.