« Fun with the Blackstone S-1 | Main | Picking Hits, and the Trouble with NewTube »

Latest Stories

• Bubbles are Good For You Because ... They Are
• Quote of the Day: Commodities Markets
• San Diego Homes Bottoming?
• The Myth of the Angel Investor
• Pete Peterson on Subprime, Bailouts, etc.

March 22, 2007

Sequoia Capital as Charity Case

In the press release announcing he will not stand for re-election to Google's board of directors, Sequoia Capital's Mike Moritz makes this statement:

Larry and Sergey's originality and the remarkable accomplishments of Eric and the Google management have generated substantial returns for Sequoia Capital's limited partners - almost all of which are charities.

Is it just me, or does this seem a somewhat incongruous statement in the context? Why, in saying he won't stand for re-election to Google's board, does Mike feel the need to tell us that most of Sequoia's investors are charities?

I'm not saying Sequoia's LPs aren't charities, just that I don't really understand why Mike thinks this is something we need to know in his won't-stand-for-board-seat context. Is it that he's down with Google's save-the-world ethos, so we're being told this as a sorta parting sop, one whereby the buckets of money made by Sequoia from Google stock aren't just normal buckets, but special buckets that went to charities?

Update: As a quasi-related aside, Valleywag, usually insightful on this sort of thing, muses (wrongly) that Mike is leaving Google's board because he is too busy shunting emails for his inferiors at Sequoia. I just don't buy that. In general I think it's a bad idea for VCs to stay too long on investee boards once those companies have gone public -- it's a distraction from making new investments, it creates conflicts, etc. I'm guessing Mike planned all along to get off the Google board when he could, and this is as good a time as any.

Sphere It   |   Digg it   |   Bookmark it   |   Stumble it

Comments