I'm not sure if you know but all of this has been tried or is currently how it works.
To begin with, most GP's have north of 5% of their net worth in the Funds or they're leveraged and borrowing against their homes etc. Partners usually are paying 30ish of their take home into funds.
Individual investments on a single deal are called an "American Waterfall" Vs a "European Waterfall," which is the whole fund. Each incentivization structure provides remarkably different issues. neither is perfect. BOth are prevalent in the market today.
Flat cost structure funds exist as well. Also, remember all fees are just added to the costs the fund needs to return. So VCs are incentivized to keep them low, they many don't do this.
The rest explains why the water in that moat isn’t very deep, that there’s no alligators in it, and that the competitors are carrying portable bridges.
FriendFeed! It was great. Pre-facebook you could build a feed using RSS from all your sources or comments off other sites. It was chronological and it excluded any algorithms. - If you subscribed to your friend feeds all the data slid into a chronological feed on your main site. It was the best, initially FB kept most of these features but in the end slowly killed them.
<quote> Our main findings can be summarized as follows. First, parental income matters for the probability of becoming an inventor, and it does so even after controlling for other background Our main findings can be summarized as follows. First, parental income matters for the probability of becoming an inventor, and it does so even after controlling for other background variables and for IQ. Second, the estimated impact of parental income is greatly diminished once parental socioeconomic status and education, and the indi- vidual’s IQ are controlled for, dropping by 2/3rds. Third, IQ has both a direct effect on the probability of inventing which is almost five times as large as that of having a high-income father, and an indirect effect through education. Finally, the impact of IQ is larger and more convex for inventors than for medical doctors or lawyers variables and for IQ. Second, the estimated impact of parental income is greatly diminished once parental socioeconomic status and education, and the indi- vidual’s IQ are controlled for, dropping by 2/3rds. Third, IQ has both a direct effect on the probability of inventing which is almost five times as large as that of having a high-income father, and an indirect effect through education. Finally, the impact of IQ is larger and more convex for inventors than for medical doctors or lawyers </quote>
Oh, if you find the story of BER hilarious and troubling you should read up on the 2021 vote for federal and local parliaments. Or the civil administration there in general where you have to make an appointment to get your passport renewed months in advance.
One candidate was generally hated by the public and got fucked by the press with "creative photo editing", badly.
One candidate was poised to become the first green chancellor, but then managed to have not one, not two, but three case of academic fraud and lying about her past tacked to her ticket. Her party came in second.
One candidate was all about some nebulous idea of "freedom", which made him relevant enough that his party now is king maker, when the first-time voters, who traditionally would go to the Green Party, decided enough Covid Lockdowns is enough.
And one candidate did ... nothing. Absolutely nothing. Which means he also couldn't embarrass himself (even though historically, he's a ... problematic ... figure). This guy came in first, so he's going to be the next chancellor.
And that's just the candidates. Then you got the State of Berlin obviously unable to hold democratic elections, given
- there was a lack of ballots in many voting offices
- in some voting offices, there were ballots for other districts, which rendered those votes invalid
- they accidentally allowed 16-year-olds to vote in the federal elections (where you have to be 18 to vote)
- they accidentally gave a mandate to the wrong guy, who shared the same name, but not the same party affiliation with the actual winner
- some votes were cast after 18:00, which is the official cutoff date
- in some districts, there was a 150% participation rate
- some offices sent people waiting in line home because "it's unlikely you'll be in in time"
- ... I am sure I am missing a few catastrophes - a LOT went wrong in Berlin ...
As of time of writing, it is indeed front page on HN. Your comment's other claims also appear to be true. Since we agree on the facts so far, let's discuss the article.
Why Sikorsky is not worth a lot of money money Sales were up 14% year of year... which is meh compared to tech companies. In 2015 they made $51 Million for the entire year. so their margins are tiny. crappy business to be in - but consistent.
Sure, but a lot of these companies are not even profitable. The HOPE of massive profits seems to be worth more than the proof that a business can be in the black. And Sikorsky, honestly, could probably have higher margins, but they are in the business where billions disappear on boondoggles.
To begin with, most GP's have north of 5% of their net worth in the Funds or they're leveraged and borrowing against their homes etc. Partners usually are paying 30ish of their take home into funds.
Individual investments on a single deal are called an "American Waterfall" Vs a "European Waterfall," which is the whole fund. Each incentivization structure provides remarkably different issues. neither is perfect. BOth are prevalent in the market today.
Flat cost structure funds exist as well. Also, remember all fees are just added to the costs the fund needs to return. So VCs are incentivized to keep them low, they many don't do this.