Conversation

Feedback needed! What's wrong or missing from this 2x2? I'm trying to make the case that scientific investing is *missing* an important type of investment manager: the YC or angel investor for science. Someone with high autonomy making lots of small bets.
Image
10
27
Replying to
Why do you need the second 2x2 at all? Are the budget/autonomy axes wrong for science philanthropy? Looks like you’re arguing a missing coverage zone on outer 2x2. There’s no fundamental difference between science and commercial technology investing here unless you make one.
Replying to and
Ie your color coding of phrases is enough. When I make nested 2x2s they introduce entirely new axis pairs and fit entirely within 1 quadrant of the outer one
1
Replying to
Science philanthropy is just a weird egg: everyone does it differently so it's tough to pin down precisely. But they all fit within that region.