« LazyWeb Request: Automated Locale for Arbitrary URLs | Main | For Jumbo-Jet Junkies Only »
Latest Stories
- Excel Wankers and Recession Averages
- Sorry, New York is Closed. Check Back Later.
- Catching Falling 2009 Earnings Estimate Knife
- Survivorship Bias in Global Markets
- Talking Positions on a Lazy-ish Retirement Portfolio
November 26, 2006
Summary of Recent Venture Capital Research
While the stuff is sometimes unintentionally hilarious, there is a burgeoning academic industry in venture capital research -- and it's now and then worth a scan. The following papers have all recently appeared in academic journals (even if some of them have been floating around as working papers for considerably longer):- The size of venture capital and private equity fund portfolios. The gist: There is an optimal size of a VC's portfolio, and the answer is ... it depends.
- Crowding out private equity: Canadian evidence. The gist: Tax advantaged private equity funds have crowded out more orthodox funds from the Canadian market, with the result being less available venture capital.
- IPOs, acquisitions, and the use of convertible securities in venture capital. The gist: VCs aren't just being pricks when they use convertible preferred shares in company financings -- they're being smart, wealth-maximizing pricks.
- What you are is what you like -- Similarity biases in venture capitalists' evaluations of startup teams. The gist: VCs like to invest in people who remind them of themselves.
- How venture capitalists respond to unmet expectations: The role of social environment. The gist: Inexperienced VCs panic at the first sign of a problem in portfolio companies, while more experienced VCs try to work it out -- and then they panic.
Sphere It
|
Digg it
|
Bookmark it
|
Stumble it
|
Facebook it
re: similarity biases
See also your post on Sequoia's investment criteria, specifically Team DNA ("the smartest or most clever in their domain"):
http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/2006/11/14/what_sequoia_ca.html
I suspect that similarity was measured in based in part upon self-reports
;-)









i've had one article floating around JCV for 5 yrs and it appears in the same issue as Frank et al.'s.
Either you didn't mention it b/c you didn't like it or it's not directly relevant ;)
http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbvent/v21y2006i6p886-909.html