[001sky]

A quick Wikipedia check shows that technically venture is actually a subset of private equity...Vcs as investors with a mandate to invest in a specific asset class

A more pointed critique is that these are too simple definitions. Its like saying a student is a person that goes to school. Its the same idea as before at reduced scale.[1] They are threshold definitions.

The point of PGs swans and DM's article here: what is the environment for investing and what are the dynamics of gameplay.

If you want to talk about portfolio theory etc fine. But the conventional wisdom is for all VC's: it's better to copy the <strategy> of the winners and differentiate on the <execution>. Arguably, DM is saying the opposite: we cant compete on the <execution>, so we'll differentiate on the <strategy>.

On the aside, I appreciate the note. I won't overexplain myself here.

___________

[1] see: http://lesswrong.com/lw/e95/the_worst_argument_in_the_world/