Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

Probably because return data doesn’t support it Tragicallyhttps://twitter.com/webdevMason/status/1039311534525042689 …

If you believe you can beat the market and then you don't, your returns are telling you *something,* and it's up to you to interpet that in a way that doesn't leave you shirtless

I believe so much in the dynamic you described that there’s a good chance I start a company soon to address it. That said, given today’s funding reality you have to believe LPs of VC firms are either really, really dumb, or heartless capitalists. I believe the latter.

An LP who's getting enviable returns is probably not really, really dumb. Probably pretty capitalist, probably not particularly heartless or sentimental. I think you may have misread my claim, or stuffed it with a little more sugar than the [very simple] recipe called for

More sugar?

I'm not aware of any body of data that contradicts the claim that returns will generally be higher (as a function of initial investment) for those who win that were most undervalued at the point of investment

Most undervalued founders today: - women - URMs VC data is what it is So, VC backers are either dumb, or they are pursuing maximal returns I would like to change their calculus on the latter

I’m quite away this was not your original point. I’m a solid reader. I took it another direction. Hoping that’s agreeable.