[potatolicious]

> "Imagine that you have to place a bet between two new companies as to which one is going to experience several years of very high growth, to one day become a billion dollar company. Now imagine that you know nothing – zero – about either company except that they were founded in the same year, and that one has raised $10 million in venture funding, and the other has raised $0."

Well, it's a great thing we're never, ever, ever in that situation!

> "After all, there are a lot of attributes that predict success in a startup. Highly talented founders, large market opportunity, a great idea, experienced advisors, etc. etc. We can debate this list as much as we want; the fact is none of these can be looked up in Crunchbase."

Well shit guys, it looks like Crunchbase is the only reasonable way for reporters (or even the general public) to find out about a startup, its team, its advisors, its board, and its market. Let's pack it up and go home.

This whole thing sounds like "VC dollars raised is not a bad metrics because it's easier than actual research".