Disqus - Latest Comments for siscokid422

Re: Meet Jane Doe, Astronaut

bsiscovick — Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:43:02 -0000

At least that's my opinion.

Re: Meet Jane Doe, Astronaut

bsiscovick — Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:42:49 -0000

Yes, it is in fact a test.

Re: Meet Jane Doe, Astronaut

bsiscovick — Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:41:22 -0000

should this work?

Re: Bits of Cents — 2014: A Retrospective

bsiscovick — Mon, 12 Jan 2015 22:00:12 -0000

awesome post matt. love seeing the hard work payoff...

Re: Getting An Outside Lead – The Myth Of Third Party Validation

bsiscovick — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:15:47 -0000

100%

Re: Getting An Outside Lead – The Myth Of Third Party Validation

bsiscovick — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 08:28:47 -0000

If only it were that easy. Instinct as informed by experience, maybe...

Re: Getting An Outside Lead – The Myth Of Third Party Validation

bsiscovick — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 08:03:04 -0000

I found this topic to be one of the most commonly discussed and debated during my tenure at IA. We often went back and forth on the pros and cons and discovered, through countless conversations with other GPs, the full gamut of opinions and approaches on the matter.

The only cautionary note I would add is that USV is so damn good, smart and experienced that you guys have an incredibly finely tuned radar to identify when pushing harder makes sense and when it doesn't. I think it takes years, and lots of mistakes, to tune this radar. As a startup fund, IA made mistakes both ways on this topic - at times we led subsequent rounds when we probably should not have (failure of falling in love) and we missed opportunities to lead follow on rounds when we absolutely should have (failure to use our information and access advantage). These were costly mistakes.

That said, it is clear to me that many (if not most) of the best investors employ the strategy outlined in Fred's post so I postulate that one of the critical, and most difficult, learning curves to ascend as new a GP and firm is to figure out how to deploy effective follow on/buying up strategy.

Re: - Thisisgoingtobebig.com - Creating Better VCs: An Accelerator for the Dark Side

bsiscovick — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 08:40:02 -0000

Very interesting idea and would surely be useful for emerging managers. Probably wouldn't scale too large given where the bar *should be* to manage and invest OPM.

I think Kaufman would argue they cover most of this. Yes fellows go work for others, but many leverage what they learn and the relationships they build to eventually raise their own funds. That said, Kaufman costs a LOT of money to participants whereas your conception provides capital in exchange for equity.

Intriguing.

Re: Full stack startups

bsiscovick — Wed, 19 Mar 2014 15:26:25 -0000

The two concepts are not in conflict with each other. Very different, and in fact quite complimentary, types of companies. I would argue the full stack (aka end-to-end customer experience) company would not be possibly without the critical enabling infrastructure provided by the AWS-ization of service chains.

Re: Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado

bsiscovick — Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:27:19 -0000

Amen.

For some wonderful education and entertainment, watch Milton Friedman discussing his views on drug laws. Absolutely fascinating:

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Re: Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado

bsiscovick — Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:23:07 -0000

"A bit of wine may enhance the pleasure of good food, be a lovely flavor in cooking while marijuana serves only the purpose of getting high."

This is naive and borderline offensive.

Have you ever listened to music high? Have you ever been to an art gallery high? Have you ever engaged in a deep philosophical discussion high? Have you ever written poetry high?

The way you use the term 'high' makes it sound juvenile and asinine, when in fact, many use marijuana *exactly* the same way you describe using wine to enhance the flavor of your cooking.

Re: Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado

bsiscovick — Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:18:59 -0000

Completely disagree. It is not the "intoxicated state" that drives someone to try heroin or the like. It is the innate personality of the individual who seeks that sort of 'high' - whether as an escape, or an adventure or a thrill. Just because someone who uses heroin has used marijuana in the past does not imply that marijuana use leads to heroin use.

Frankly, to compare the impact and experience of marijuana to that of heroin or other 'hard' drugs is just classically ill informed. That said, you clearly do no have much personal experience with it so it is impossible to engage in a reasonable debate where you fundamentally do not understand the underlying products and their effects.

Re: Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado

bsiscovick — Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:10:34 -0000

100% agree.

Re: Justin Singer

bsiscovick — Wed, 06 Nov 2013 15:00:20 -0000

opening those doors of perception is see...

Re: The $50 Lesson

bsiscovick — Wed, 06 Nov 2013 08:20:06 -0000

ill take it.

Re: Moving On

bsiscovick — Mon, 23 Sep 2013 23:15:01 -0000

The d

Re: Moving On

bsiscovick — Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:42:19 -0000

thx simon

Re: Moving On

bsiscovick — Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:42:13 -0000

the ellie!

Re: When your customer calls you dumb, real stupidity is not listening

bsiscovick — Wed, 29 May 2013 16:39:26 -0000

i appreciate your ability to cut through the tone and focus on the meat. i hear ya but just feel strongly about the way messages are conveyed. that is all.

Re: When your customer calls you dumb, real stupidity is not listening

bsiscovick — Tue, 28 May 2013 17:55:45 -0000

you know i only have love and respect for you, phin. i completely agree that we need to take these critiques seriously and learn from them. mark does a wonderful job of providing a counterpoint to each issue, acknowledging lots of material areas for improvement.

but i don't believe in the infalible customer theory. despite our collective shortcomings as VCs, you and mark and so many of our extremely hard working, dedicated venture colleagues do not deserve to be subject to rude, offensive and simplistically generalized diatribes. @dunn is extremely high profile with a powerful platform to influence people. he could have conveyed the message in a constructive manner, instead he chose to indiscriminately and rudely attack.

you don't deserve to be shat on in that way. mark doesn't deserve it. the vast majority of our friends and colleagues in the industry don't deserve it.

despite the fact that i know it is a loosing battle, my hope is that we can promote those who engage these important conversations with respect, empathy and humility and not those who sling shit.

Re: It is not ok to hate me

bsiscovick — Tue, 28 May 2013 17:28:56 -0000

thx daren

Re: It is not ok to hate me

bsiscovick — Mon, 27 May 2013 21:08:12 -0000

thx mark

Re: #3010: The Video

bsiscovick — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 18:13:06 -0000

this looks insanely awesome. must. do.

Re: Crowdfunding science

bsiscovick — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 15:25:39 -0000

Really interesting post. My dad is in academic medicine (MD,MPH) and derives almost all of his funding from government grants - which are becoming insanely difficult to get with gov funding cutbacks.

WRT crowdfunding science, I have two big questions:

First, what is the incentive structure for patrons? In the more general purpose world of crowdsourcing (check out http://www.kickstarter.com/ - the clear market leader), there are two main incentives to fund - 1) personal interest/passion; 2) the promise of some sort of gift/product in return (once it is built). In science, I would imagine most funding would have to come from those considering it a chartable donation. Because it structurally lacks a self-interested incentive, I wonder if these things can scale to fund sizable projects.

Second, are patrons sufficiently educated to understand projects and the backgrounds of the principal investigators *enough* to make funding decisions? These projects are generally highly complex, I wonder how many people feel 'qualified' making a funding decision.

Re: Our Brave New World: mobile connectivity and the Internet of Things

bsiscovick — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:00:08 -0000

Connecting physical objects does not necessarily involve massive infrastructure investment nor super sophisticated technological innovation. There are lots of more manageable hacks. Look at Uber - they don't actually insert a computer in cars, but rather just outfit the driver with an uber connected mobile device. They use existing hardware that everyone is already carrying around...

But yes, there are definitely many situations in which tech investment and innovation are required to outfit the physical object with smart connectivity.