[mvpu]

A VC friend once told me that _all_ money coming into VC via LPs represents <5% of their total assets, so even if all the VCs loose all the money their raised from their LPs nobody loses breath - only damage is to reputation. So fund raising is mostly about storytelling and showtime. Fund losing is about back luck. Better luck. Next time.

[gatsby]

Huh?

[bigbadgoose]

VCs take money from Limited Partners (LPs). For the LPs, they spread less than 5% of their investable assets across a venture strategy. If it doesn't pan out, no big deal.

So from their perspective, fundraising is spectacle and excitement, and losing investments are part of the loss model.

--

Side note, a return model heuristic for LPs: 1 in 10 yields 10x, 1 in 100 yields 1000x

[nostrademons]

From the perspective of the LP, sure.

From the perspective of the VC, if they have a bunch of losers in their portfolio it means that they're not going to be able to raise another fund in 10 years, they won't have any carried interest (which is where VCs make the bulk of their compensation - it's their 20% of the total profits), and they'll have to content themselves with the salary they drew from the fund management fees.

BTW, most LPs are things like pension funds and university endowments, along with hedge funds that pensions & universities invest in. So if you're ever wondering why your parents' retirement has suddenly vanished or your kids can't afford to go to college, this is why.