Silly Stuff About KP and Web 2.0

The usual savvy Tom Foremski has up some questionable stuff today about venture firm Kleiner Perkins and Web 2.0. According to Tom, the VC leaders at KP have "stopped" investing in Web 2.0 companies, woe betide all trend-chasing entrepreneurs and VCs.

Leaving aside that I think Web 2.0 is as overused a term as "and", "the", and "and", and that I have been a noisy critic of many of the hypesters in this area, but this is meaningless stuff. For starters, denying the massive shift to online media/ads/community is silly. There is investable change afoot, whether people like it or not.

Now, in KP’s case the firm has studiously been doing deals outside of orthodox Web 2.0 for some time now, with a heavy emphasis on cleantech, security, and life sciences. The company is not exactly at the epicenter of All Things Web 2.0, matter of fact I’m hard-pressed to think of a recent exit. Then again, I’m not sure what KP calls its current batch of 2.0ish companies. The Companies Formerly Known As Web 2.0? The Investments That We Deny To Our LPs?

Anyway, what are we really seeing here? I have no doubt that KP is not doing any/many consumer/media/net deals, but that isn’t news and hasn’t been for a while. The firm is, increasingly, of a different generation from the current crop of entrepreneurs, and it is pursuing its own strategy, rightly or wrongly. That’s all — no more and no less.


  1. you are right. Doerr and alum Khosla are caught on the green bug and hang out with policy makers as much as entrepreneurs. Ray Lane, ex Oracle, thinks enterprise software is tired…KP to me is doing what I think (at least my romantic notion of) VCs should be doing…taking risks in early, unproven markets…big rewards for high risks…most other VCs want former but avoid the latter and want to see a 12 month exit..