VC tab on WSO
Recent vc discussion shows theres some interest (as well as misunderstanding) in the vc industry. Further, even though vc isn't "pure finance" its pretty clear it's becoming more relevant to other finance industries given so many companies both getting huge funding and going public (via spac or ipo). Ms me if you want I get it but seriously, I think it'd be an interesting board and I'm not sure a good vc forum exists elsewhere on the internet.
We have the same discussions in our firm, because our VC team ultimately reports into the PE MDs.
I would argue the PE forums is appropriate, but with enough content, maybe we do need a VC one.
https://news.ycombinator.com
They opine in the comments section if that’s what you’re looking for
I appreciate the link
Completely agree
Totally agree - been waiting for them to start a VC tab for a while
Hunnid P
I think a bigger priority is a software engineering forum because that seems to be the absolutely best job in the world with zero downsides compared to the stupid finance bros
VC is gambling for rich Chad/Brad/Thad VIs with no actual investment acumen. Fuck outta here with this horseshit.
Like half of all CA pension funds are in vc...
Good luck to them. I think that’s a patently stupid asset allocation structure.
VC is the saying “even a broken clock is right two times a day” as a career
Precisely.
VC is just a circle jerk of confirmation bias that leads to preposterously overinflated valuations on new ventures which are, in the overwhelming majority of cases, based on dogshit business models and will never become profitable. But once Ruane or YCombinator or Andreessen Horowitz or whatever other overconfident SV douchebag puts their stamp of approval on it, it goes from “steaming pile of dogshit” to “billion dollar pile of steaming dogshit” (aka Unicorn).
If you include a VC tab then you'll also need a growth PE tab, then change the current PE tab to LBO PE... etc.
I understand what you're getting at in that it's differentiated from other parts of finance, but VC falls under the PE umbrella. So for the sake of keeping the interface clean, my opinion is that having a VC tab is unnecessary.
Otherwise, where's the deal advisory (big 4 valuation) tab? You can argue that it's completely different from investment banking.
Operations/risk? Different enough from the other tabs on this website.
Restructuring tab? It's completely different from M&A banking.
PWM tab? PWM/private banking is completely different from institutional asset management.
Debt research vs. equity research? Both are completely different skillsets.
Let's be real - sales is COMPLETELY different from trading, so why is it lumped together in the same forum? Even if they're related, they're two completely different roles.
The quantity of spaces in your response is inspiring. But while I understand your point I disagree. I know vc is technically PE but they are truly different in almost all ways (strategy, operations, structure, fund raising, recruiting, development, ...should I go on). A vc fund is really not comparable to any other PE fund aside from the fact that they are both equity...
Yes, I agree with what you're saying, but that argument can be made about any of the spaces I brought up.
If that's the point you focus on, then what about the differences between distressed PE strategies and plain vanilla LBOs? Or distressed debt lending? There isn't a tab for private debt, yet it's just as different from private equity as VC is from plain vanilla LBOs.
While VC could qualify as low effort PE... don’t insult PE like that. VC is a dumpster fire of PE values desecrated by advertising/social media marketing techniques. My most retarded SA could easily build whatever “proprietary models” the weirdos at the average VC firm are trumpeting.
It doesn’t warrant a separate forum because most VC is only finance scented. 95% of VC success stories make about much sense as doge coin mooning. We don’t have a subforum to discuss TikTok influencers or Elon Musk’s stock picks so why would we need a platform to discuss their “finance” counterparts
I disagree. It's easy to say true finance only exists on Wall Street but if it weren't for vc's a company like palantir wouldn't survive to what it is today. Find me a company that ipo'ed (or spac'ed) that didn't get vc funded. Yeah the fin models matter less but its still allocation of resources (funds) which, as I understand it, is the underlying principle of modern finance.
Palantir’s success is not attributable to VCs, it is because Thiel and Karp, both of whom worked in finance, know what they are doing.
And I was talking about the average VC team, not your A16z, KPs and Sequoias. A handful of places are worthy of discussion but 1) they all pretty much invest in the same things anyway and 2) we don’t need another sub forum to talk about 5 groups
I don't think WSO would want to do this. From their perspective, they want to have subforums that are popping 24/7 with new threads all the time. The more subdivisions they make, the less active each subdivision will be and the more it will hurt the overall perceived activity level on the site. Like another commenter mentioned, if you make a VC forum, you might also split the PE into growth PE and LBO PE. There are divisions you can easily make in RE and certainly in CF as well. Where does it end?
Ex aut quia asperiores. Et libero deserunt non adipisci. Quisquam qui quia quia eum. Ut quas saepe tenetur eligendi.
Cum occaecati quo velit omnis harum. Omnis pariatur impedit quos nostrum quo earum accusamus. Maxime non ducimus iusto sit. Exercitationem et velit sit.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Harum qui et magnam alias debitis quae dolor. Consequatur magnam id necessitatibus voluptatem fugiat maiores dolor aliquam. Expedita voluptas culpa impedit enim laborum tempora non.
Dolor ducimus et nulla ut sit est est. Corrupti doloribus velit ad deserunt et id. Ut illo voluptas consequatur nemo est ad. Quia sint in itaque a animi necessitatibus. Quisquam non necessitatibus et officia. Voluptatem odit dignissimos enim amet quis.
Sunt doloribus sapiente saepe cum. Nam porro maxime voluptatem est. Praesentium eligendi sunt et dignissimos dolor quo fugit modi.