[jackcosgrove]

I thought the name of the game in VC was investing in 20+ companies and seeing what sticks. You would need enough money at that point that being an accredited investor would be a foregone conclusion according to the net worth standard.

Investing several thousand here or there on one or two companies seems incredibly risky, riskier than what the pros are willing to tolerate.

[dbish]

Yes, I’m seeing a lot of younger people trying to play the angel investor game without the capital and without realizing many angels don’t make reasonable returns but it doesn’t matter to them because it’s play money and more a chance to support new ideas and learn about things. Personally, I put aside an amount I want to angel invest every year and assume it’s burned but I really couldn’t afford to do that in a responsible way until I was well beyond the accredited investor minimum point (in yearly income).

[browningstreet]

In regional hubs, a lot of the angel networks are retired people. Most of them, in my experience, are playing at being technologists or investors. They usually made some money in more traditional business endeavors. Usually gets a bit of traction in the local government / business lunch / community innovation scene.

[cbtacy]

Yup. It's important to understand how the Power Law Curve applies to early stage investing.

[tedmiston]

Correct. Much better idea statistically to just throw it into a good index fund if your goal is returns.

Perhaps it could be useful if the goal is learning oriented.

[vc-doggie]

Absolutely, this.