> Ron Conway, probably the most successful angel investor in SV, has frequently said "you never argue with metrics."
I disagree. Metrics only indicate what people think they want, not what they need. Metrics are only accurate if you look for trends. Long-lasting businesses don't rely on trends.
> In a talk at Startup School 2012, he said that he "didn't get" Facebook.
Facebook, just like AirBnb, make a lot of sense. You don't need metrics to understand that.
The big problem with most investors today (not all of them) is their mindset and lack of vision. They're sheeps, just like everybody else. The only difference is that they had success and experience, which skew reality and reinforces old ways of thinking, which they try to apply to future investments. It doesn't work that way.
Do you want to live in a world where investors all throw their money at the next Instagram? Or do you want to live in a world where they invest in the next Xerox Parc?
People used to have dreams, people used to have big ideas. Now, it's all about quick money. Heck, the goal of many startups now is to get acquired by larger players. How sad is that?
Pinterest is not an awful idea, but unless they have a larger vision in mind, they're going nowhere.
> Metrics only indicate what people think they want, not what they need. Metrics are only accurate if you look for trends. Long-lasting businesses don't rely on trends.
This really does not make any sense. Metrics as a general concept can and do encapsulate all the positive things you just mentioned (long-lasting value, what people need, etc). Just because a subset is shitty/misleading does not invalidate my argument. Obviously an investor must sift shitty metrics from good metrics, and shitty teams (that appear good) from good teams.
> Facebook, just like AirBnb, make a lot of sense. You don't need metrics to understand that.
Firstly, hindsight is 20/20, so that's easy for you to say. Obviously everyone now believes Facebook is a good idea; the same is not true back in 2004. Good investors recognize that they cannot necessarily tell the good ideas from the bad ideas, so they focus on team/metrics. The most revolutionary ideas typically seem like bad ideas.
> Do you want to live in a world where investors all throw their money at the next Instagram? Or do you want to live in a world where they invest in the next Xerox Parc?
You have not provided a reason we cannot have a world with both. Those are not mutually exclusive.
I disagree. Metrics only indicate what people think they want, not what they need. Metrics are only accurate if you look for trends. Long-lasting businesses don't rely on trends.
> In a talk at Startup School 2012, he said that he "didn't get" Facebook.
Facebook, just like AirBnb, make a lot of sense. You don't need metrics to understand that.
The big problem with most investors today (not all of them) is their mindset and lack of vision. They're sheeps, just like everybody else. The only difference is that they had success and experience, which skew reality and reinforces old ways of thinking, which they try to apply to future investments. It doesn't work that way.
Do you want to live in a world where investors all throw their money at the next Instagram? Or do you want to live in a world where they invest in the next Xerox Parc?
People used to have dreams, people used to have big ideas. Now, it's all about quick money. Heck, the goal of many startups now is to get acquired by larger players. How sad is that?
Pinterest is not an awful idea, but unless they have a larger vision in mind, they're going nowhere.