Paul Kedrosky writes on his
blog:
Here
is a puzzler: Why are there so many venture capital blogs? It is hard not to
notice that there a host of such things out there, from Brad Feld's to Fred Wilson's, and everyone in between. Here are
five possible hypotheses:
1. Professional
service firms are highly branded by individual, so it makes sense to get out
there and present yourself as a way of attracting deal flow.
2. There are just as
many legal/financial/other blogs, but those people aren't as good at getting
media attention.
3. Venture
capitalists don't have enough to do.
4. Having a blog as
a technology VC is a way of demonstrating your technical competencies.
5. Having a blog is
a way to lay out your thought process about markets and technologies, thus
demonstrating your added value as a putative investee board member.
6. Writing
things down requires more/better thought. The thought that goes into a
post requires some time and attention. It’s easy to start to develop a “thesis” about something – to use a VC
cliché that I’m not very fond of – but much harder to really understand
something to the point of being able to organize your thoughts into a blog
post.
7. Playing with
the technology is interesting/helpful. This is different from 4 – I’m not talking
about trying to prove to anyone that you are a technologist (I’m not one). I’m talking about getting your hands dirty
and seeing what’s out there to get a better lay of the land (Mobius is an
investor in Technorati, Newsgator and Feedburner, for example, so its directly
relevant to my work).
8. Good VCs
benefit from better educated entrepreneurs. Too much of venture capital
seems like a black hole to many entrepreneurs. Perhaps this drives better deals for VCs, but ultimately an uneven
playing field doesn’t really benefit anyone. Writing about how to give better VC pitches or what term sheet terms
actually mean is a way of shedding light into the vortex and demystifying
venture capital. Clearly, education is a
theme across many of the VC blogs out there.
9. Creating a name. This is
totally personal and perhaps only applicable to me, but it’s an important part
of why I blog, so its worth mentioning. I imagine this is more true for the small number of non-partner VC
bloggers like myself, but let’s face it – the VC world has a hierarchy and I’m
trying to climb my way up it. Blogging
is a way to give myself a voice that can perhaps be heard beyond my firm (The
Wall St. Journal isn’t exactly beating down my door for quotes at the
moment). I imagine this is a motivator
for partner VC bloggers as well (although I don’t know that they would admit it
as readily)
Also see Jeff Clavier's response to Paul's question here.
I wonder more why there are so many blogs, and blog entries, about blogging.
Posted by: Dave Jilk | May 11, 2005 at 10:06 PM
The blog (a.k.a. "online journal") has been around for years, especially among the younger crowd – look at www.livejournal.com. I laughed at Seth's entry describing the drive behind blogging and the fact VC’s are finally realizing they’re spending time using the media. To me, I take it for granted since I've been doing it for years. As a member of the younger crowd, or rather a former member, I remember posting 4 years ago how journaling consumed my free time and now the VCs are going through the same cycle. I still haven't run into anyone 23 or younger who "blogs,” rather we “journal” or “make an entry”, not a blog.
On a side note, please be mindful when blogging or joining sites like myspace.com. Employers Google applicants names and search through online communities to unearth the dirt on applicants, so I heard on NPR.
Posted by: Alex Koles | June 16, 2005 at 02:02 PM