“Something
Ventured” is a documentary celebrating Silicon Valley venture capitalists. The
movie made me angry.
I have to first
admit, I am not sympathetic to the people on this movie. Now, they come across
as nice enough in the edited version of their conversations, but when at the
close they do that thing where they show the characters at the end of the
movies and give a capsule synopsis of what happened after that’s what make me
think something’s off. One of the guys had built and operated the world’s first
fully computerized yacht. Another noted that his favorite charity was the Ayn
Rand institute. They literally must have called this guy up after most of the
production was done and basically asked him “what do you want to be your legacy?”
and he said the Ayn Rand institute.
Here’s the problem
with that. You can talk about how good these guys are since they helped lend
expertise and cash to companies at early stages when they needed the capital to
grow. Perhaps we can see them as something like the Walrasian crier, helping
the market work. But to think that they’re the ones with the new idea, the ones
really taking risk to the point where they identify with Randian principals is
laughable. The Objectivism ideal is that it is the entrepreneur who is taking
the risk, the individual superman who is making the world going. If anything,
the VC people are parasites and leeches on the people who are making
contributions to society. For every Genentech where the VC helped and ended up
saving lives, there’s an Apple or Cisco where the founder was kicked out unceremoniously.
That’s not making the economy work better, that’s predatory.
And then we have
to struggle with the fact that VC as an industry has not been around forever.
Now it is attached to Silicon Valley, but the question I had when I was
watching this was “Where was the VC that helped Edison?” Business formation
happened before these vulture funds came to being. But an even bigger question
in terms of business formation is why has it dropped? If VC funds are really
making the economy more efficient, there would be more jobs created by these
new firms. So a chart like the one below would trend up, and not down (there
are a lot of variables having an effect here, not just VC firms).
It also made me
think about what kind of distortions these funds have on the market. There is
money to be made, but there are very few Googles. So the firms have to spread
their money around, hoping to have a major hit that makes up for their losses
elsewhere. This does two things that I can think of. First, it takes away the
incentive to go public and face the reporting requirements that that brings.
Second, it increases valuations all around, boosting balance sheets on
companies that really haven’t figured out how to make a profit. I’m thinking
here specifically of Uber, which is using flows of VC money to undercut the
taxi industry worldwide and it’s going to be horrible to see that bubble pop
and all the diminished capacity that exists because everyone was chasing this
phantom yield.
And finally, we
have to ask if they’re even that good. Most of the top flight people with long experience
interviewed in this film were lamenting that they didn’t give money to apple. Why
didn’t they see the promise in what is now one of the largest companies in the
world? Jobs and Wozniak were smelly hippies with poor time management skills
and assholes to boot. So these titans of foresight and capital allocation didn’t
give them money.
Look, in a
capitalist economy, incentives need to be in place so that capital is allocated
to the place where it will benefit the most people. The profit motive is strong
and there are a lot of winners – some much bigger than others. But we don’t
need to celebrate these people as heroes.
No comments:
Post a Comment