ChiefNode

A bigger expectation gap than we once thought

Carl Weissman's article this week on the funding gap contains this passage, at the end:

If you are an academic and you cannot get someone to back your idea, do three things: take a hard look at your technology (or even ask someone else to do so); take a hard look at your expectations; and, take a hard look in the mirror. Honest assessment in these three efforts will tell you why.

If you are a VC crying crocodile tears over all of the impediments between your partnership and early-stage biotechnology investment, quit it. You make us all look like complete asses. Pull up your britches, wipe your nose, and admit it—“I am no longer a VC. I am now a private equity investor with an exceedingly small fund.” (Feelings of inadequacy to follow…time to buy a Ferrari.)

Yep. IMHO venturable ideas find venture. The rest need help, inside the university, to validate the technology, and create a market. Those that rely on the wonderful marketing reports from large analysis shops are fine, but most university technology does not yet have a market. We're doing fundamental research. We're thinking beyond tomorrow's problems, and that is a good thing. Who else is doing that? Corporate America has cut back on their own R&D. . .and then complains when universities aren't helping them create their next product.

We have an expectation gap in more than new venture funding. And read Scott Shane's new book, referenced in last week's posts.

posted by Dana Bostrom @ 08:29