Slashdot Mirror
The Inside Story of Venture Capital's Messiest Breakup (wired.com)
mirandakatz writes: The Xfund started with a bold idea and ended with one of its founders banished from the country. At Backchannel, Jessi Hempel has the definitive story of what really happened after Patrick Chung and Hugo Van Vuuren went into business together, and how a promising venture went so wrong. It's an incredibly complex story, and no one agrees on the basic facts: As Hempel writes, 'What's clear is that from the start, they had clashing visions for what they were building. The tale of Van Vuuren and Chung's partnership and its demise offers a window into how power really works in Silicon Valley, where personal relationships are the most important currency and, in order to protect capital, investors are more likely to place their bets on people they know and trust.'
Seriously, wtf?
...if nobody agrees on the basic facts? Please explain.
What a summary! Can the CIA decipher that one?
First! To give a shit. Actually, just kidding.
Why would anyone here actually care about these random people?
Gist of the story: co-founder signed papers he didn't read.
This is everyday life, people fucking each other over. Goes with the territory. Rich bitches in a slap fight. Politics is the same story. I see nothing abnormal here. Not a bad novela though... exciting stuff!
" in order to protect capital, investors are more likely to place their bets on people they know and trust."
That's just like the whole 'bet behind' strategy in blackjack. It's almost like this VC investment malarkey was a gamble...
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
VCs get what they deserve.
The most common mistake when forming partnerships is to not define in advance how it gets dissolved. What happens when it goes pear shaped and you have to close up shop? EXACTLY what happens, who pays what, gets to keep what and is responsible for what. What happens to any assents? Do they get sold at auction and the proceeds split in some way? How do you determine this?
The Second most common mistake is not clearly defining up front what the necessary and expected contributions for each of the partners along with what compensation they get from the company, both initially and in the future and how these contributions/compensations (or lack of them) affects the most common mistake mentioned above.
Finally, the third most common issue is related to the first. Should you make a go of it and decide to sell at a profit, who actually owns what?
You simply must know how you will divide up the baby, in advance, should one of the partners or circumstances dictate that you must because this usually happens under less than ideal conditions.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
You can put all the "venture capitalists" in a wood chipper for all I care.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Not much of an inside story of it's from only one party's perspective.
And doesn't matter