| Topic Name: |
Getting a VC job after Undergrad |
| Message Name: |
re: |
| Date Posted: |
05/04/2001 |
| In Reply To: |
Making career decisions on the basis of who's "tier 1 or 2" today, -especially- in the VC industry, sums up to me why you're criticizing and not doing.
VC, by definition, is a -growth- industry. Pick your partners carefully, work hard, and with a little luck, you'll have a winner that exceeds your losses.
GS and MS got their starts somewhere- Apathy is a sin, not failure. |
| Message: |
Actually you are making my point. Which is that if you think you're able to find the right VC in the rough, you'd probably be better off picking stocks for a living, or picking a billion dollar startup to join.
THe truth is that information is not easy to find, even for an experienced tech investor, let alone for a young college graduate. We rely instead on proxies to assess the strength of a firm, those proxies include a track record, a brand name that creates leverage in a relationship industry, and if nothing else, a stamp of approval on your resume for the next VC firm. Tier 1's have concrete competitive advantages over other firms that substantially increase their chances of success. Perhaps you haven't seen a tier 3 firm compete against a tier 1 for a deal. Almost without exception, it's a foregone battle.
You can go ahead and presume you're able to do better. Post the name of a couple unknown firms you consider diamonds in the rough on this board, it'll be interesting to track their progress and see how well you do.
I don't regret the extra time i spent waiting to join a tier 1 for a second....the access to business relationships, the cream of startup plans, and the best management teams
is, i can safely say, quite unrivalled by tier 3's. It is possible to make things work at a tier 3. A brilliant individual can succeed almost anywhere. But even that investor, i'd wager, would be better off starting at a brand name firm.
|
|
