background preloader

Venture Philanthropy

Facebook Twitter

Three Realities About Venture Capital. This week’s kerfuffle over Yo centered on many facets, but none got more attention than the nascent startup’s $1.2 million in venture capital funding. The reaction to this investment across the web came in several flavors. Founders complained that their own startups created far more value for society than an app that essentially acts as a doorbell, and yet, they had not received any venture capital funding.

Another strain of incredulity focused on the investors themselves, who must have either been stupid or crazy to invest in such a “useless” product. These reactions are all fair, and I can certainly understand some of the vitriol that emanated from the web this week. Unfortunately, a large number of the complaints seemed to be based on misinformation about the venture capital industry. This lack of understanding seems to have only magnified with the increasing numbers of marketers employed by VC firms. Reality #1: Venture Capital is a Small Star in the Massive Galaxy of Capital. When Can Impact Investing Create Real Impact. Although it is possible for impact investors to achieve social impact along with market rate returns, it's not easy to do and doesn't happen nearly as often as many boosters would have you believe.

(Illustration by Ben Wiseman) T here has been an increasing realization that, along with philanthropy and government aid, private enterprise can contribute to solving social and environmental problems. At the same time, a growing number of investors are expressing a desire to “do good while doing well.” These are impact investors, who seek opportunities for financial investments that produce social or environmental benefits.

This article is addressed to impact investors who wish to know whether their investments will actually contribute to achieving their social or environmental (hereafter, simply “social”) objectives. We posit that a particular investment has impact only if it increases the quantity or quality of the enterprise’s social outcomes beyond what would otherwise have occurred. Everything you need to know about the four most active edtech investors. By Carmel DeAmicis On April 28, 2014 CB Insights recently released a rundown of the investors who have poured the most capital into the education technology space since 2009. There were a few surprises on the list, alongside the obvious players.

To give a little context to the research, we did a breakdown of the top four firms, what their background in the edtech space is, and why they topped the list. We also did a quick Q&A with the founder of one of the more unexpected firms to appear — Kapor Capital. The first name on the list may seem out of place. 500 Startups, the accelerator and early stage investment firm run by Dave McClure, was the most active VC firm in edtech from 2009-2013. But on closer inspection, the fact that 500 Startups tops the list shouldn’t come as too much of a shocker to anyone who knows the firm’s strategy. The next two VC firms on the list make far more sense in the education vertical.

[image via thinkstock] Here's a look inside a typical VC's pipeline (a must-read for entrepreneurs) | VentureBeat | Entrepreneur | by Sean Jacobsohn, Emergence Capital. When I meet with entrepreneurs, I am often asked about the VC “pipeline.” How many deals do we see? How many meetings? How often do we conduct due diligence? How many of those companies do we invest in? I thought it would be helpful to provide visibility about the VC pipeline, while also outlining what helps a company move from an intro meeting into a closed investment. In order to make 10 investments, the average venture capital firm reviews approximately 1,200 companies.

Leads: These 1,200 come from network introductions, conferences, in-bound inquiries, proactive efforts, portfolio company referrals, and seed investors. The most important factor in securing a meeting is the background of the founders. Of course, the pitch also matters: Is it concise and compelling? In addition, most venture firms like to make sure that a company is not competitive with a current portfolio company.

First, most early stage VC firms look for demonstrated product/market fit. A Multi-Factor Analysis Of Startups. Editor’s note: Matt Oguz is managing director of Palo Alto Venture Science. Every decision we make from what to wear to whom to hire requires a balance of multiple factors. Sometimes we decide quickly and other times with deliberate consideration. Either way, we do this every day. Picking what to wear, for instance, depends on a number of variables: what we have in the closet, what we’ll be doing that day, what the weather’s like, etc.

Often we pick something to wear but later question our judgment. This happens for a number of reasons: We haven’t reviewed all of our clothes.We haven’t reviewed all aspects of what we’ll be doing.When we start that activity we realize there was more to it than what we assumed, such as attending a party where everyone is in a cocktail dress except you because you didn’t know the context of the party. Selecting a startup to invest in isn’t much different. We also anchor our valuations to recent events. So let’s dig deeper now. Lots of competition. Freebase. Home - LGT. Dowser: Uncovering news and stories about social innovation and social entrepreneurship. Home - Social Venture Network.