You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
I'm a bit skeptical of this frame: AFAICT, supersized funding rounds appear to be "required" by top-returning startups because top-returning startups are the ones willing to force extremely accelerated growth on themselves. They wouldn't necessarily have failed on less funding.
Of course, VC will miss some great stuff, and it's probably more likely to miss stuff that's super expensive to prototype and/or take to market at all. But those bets *do* represent a higher risk, and especially for the littler firms, that might be getting priced in accurately
I'm not in VC so this is just my outside perspective, but it seems true to me that most of the "successful" startups that get the huge returns needed multiple rounds of funding from multiple VC firms. That appears to be the outcome that gets the best returns for everyone (1/)
or is at least the competitively optimal strat for the largest VC firms. I'm skeptical of the "wipe the floor with the good ol' boys" phrasing because it seems to me to imply that some single new firm is going to outcompete what is really a network of VC firms. (2/)
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
