[jtriest]

before you make assumptions i'd check facts and/or inquire. our first fund was all of our own capital. we took 100% of the risk. didn't take ANY salary let alone a "cushy one" as for our added value, feel free to reach out to ANY of the founders we've invested in.

[pytrin]

You wrote a post about VCs in general. VCs in general raise money to create the fund and then manage it. When you invest your own money, you are typically considered an "angel" investor. It might be semantics, but I'm sure you're aware of those definitions.

And if you have enough money to start a real VC fund by yourself, chances are that you don't really need a salary... as opposed to bootstrapped startups that are just barely scraping by.

[crapshoot101]

This is just flat-out untrue. VC firms put in a significant chunk of their own funds into this - we're not talking peanuts here, we're talking about millions from general partners in some cases. This obviously differs from firm to firm, but the semantic about angel investing vs VC is just wrong.

[jtriest]

and i'd argue that the majority of vcs we syndicate deals with leverage themselves as much as possible to add value. good companies generally have their choice as to which money to accept. value add is key...