|
????再一次地需要指出,，降低風(fēng)險(xiǎn)對(duì)最終回報(bào)率的影響有限,。關(guān)鍵依然是挑選最好的經(jīng)理,。你可以只支付0.5%的管理費(fèi)，但如果這家風(fēng)投公司選錯(cuò)公司（或出價(jià)太高）,，你還是會(huì)虧錢,。 ????對(duì)我而言，考夫曼從“有限合伙人（而非一般合伙人）的責(zé)任”角度豐富了“VC模式破裂”論,。我同意有限合伙人需要做出很大的改變，但只有實(shí)際的風(fēng)投投資（即投資私營(yíng)初創(chuàng)企業(yè)的一般合伙人）繼續(xù)有獲得超額回報(bào)的巨大潛力,，這樣的改變也有意義,。多年前，Sevin Rosen就在強(qiáng)調(diào)相應(yīng)改革,，但它完全扼殺了募資，并沒有提供一個(gè)獨(dú)特的基金結(jié)構(gòu),。 ????早期投資目前仍完好——需要改變的是支持此類投資的風(fēng)投模式,。 ????譯者：老榆木 |
????And, again, risk mitigation only would have a limited impact on ultimate returns. The key remains picking the best managers. You can pay 0.5% management fees, but if the VC picks bad companies (or overpays) then you're still in the red. ????For me, Kauffman points out an important distinction in the "VC model is broken" argument, by delving down into LP commitments rather than GP commitments. I'll happily concede that the former needs vast improvement, while continuing to believe that such alterations only matter because actual venture capital investments (i.e., GPs investing in private startups) continues to hold great potential for outsized returns. Sevin Rosen was arguing on the latter slope years ago, given that it killed fundraising altogether, rather than offering up a unique fund structure. ????Early-stage investing remains fine – it's what supports such investing that needs fixing. |
最新文章