VCs Betting on Founders
Comments criticize venture capitalists, particularly a16z, for prioritizing investments in founders' reputations and hype over solid products or business viability, citing examples like Theranos and Juicero as evidence of poor due diligence.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Maybe they are investing more in the founders than the product?
This looks like a good example of investing in the founders, not in the business. The business is very WTF, but the article makes the founder sound like a known quantity.
my cynical answer: better/more coverage of the startups they fund?
This story would be more believable if you mentioned being funded by a16z.
Unsure why you are being downvoted.Perhaps some founders and investors don't want this to be known...
You're being modded down for whining, no doubt, but I can see where you're coming from. Every dollar that goes to Theranos (or Enron, or any number of other slickly-packaged plays) is a dollar that doesn't go to someone else's company. Gotta be frustrating to watch that happen over and over when you're personally sure you're a better bet.
What do you expect? a16z-funded and they love to talk about how much they've raised, thought-leader style co-founders, etc.
Cool story, great read! I'm surprised how negative some of the comments here on HN were. They're probably just envious about how they're not getting that sweet, sweet investor money!
Some people seeking funding don’t seem like good investments.
A16Z wants to make money by funding tech companies, so if your perspective is correct they have an interest in hyping it.