不可量化的风险
不可量化的风险
如今启动的许多Web 2.0初创公司都属于那种其风险完全无法先验量化的类型。这些大多是高度社交化的应用程序,需要大量人群稍微改变他们的行为或采用新行为才能运作。这个列表包括点对点借贷、用于推荐事物的社交网络、新的群组通信系统、可下载的照片共享客户端等。虽然过去有些类似的方案取得了成功(特别是MySpace、Flickr、EBay、Skype、Craigslist),但失败的案例要多得多。
作为企业家创办这类企业的问题是,你基本上必须在任何理性的风险投资家考虑投资你之前达到采用曲线的上升阶段。当然,如果成功了,这些企业可以拥有惊人的网络效应,但在用户采用之前,几乎不可能以任何方式量化采用风险,因此向风险投资家推销变得非常非常困难。即使有一位合伙人相信该服务会被采用,他/她也无法用任何数据说服其他合伙人。因此,这类获得资助的少数公司往往要么因为名人企业家而获得资助,要么因为泡沫投资狂热而获得资助。
基本上,如果你没有过往业绩记录,并且正在创办一家需要临界用户量来做某事的Web 2.0公司,而迄今为止几乎没有证据表明人们在网上做过这件事,那么你要么必须自筹资金一段时间,要么给风险投资家一些其他替代指标(名人企业家、核心技术开发),要么找到一个相信的个人天使投资人(说起来容易做起来难)。
另一方面,那些从事硬核技术开发且价值相对确定的企业家,往往会以极大的羡慕眼光看待社交网络/点对点领域的成功企业。后者似乎拥有牢不可破的垄断地位、有机增长且没有复杂的开发需求。然而,这只是幸存者偏差在起作用。社交/点对点业务完全失败的几率要高得多,这一点仅通过观察成功者是看不出来的。
Unquantifiable Risk
A lot of the Web 2.0 startups getting started these days are of the variety where their risk is completely unquantifiable a priori. Mostly, these are highly social applications which require a large group of people to change their behavior slightly or to adopt a new behavior to work. The list includes peer-to-peer lending, social networks for recommending things, new group communication systems, downloadable photo sharing clients, etc. While some similar schemes have worked in the past (notably, MySpace, Flickr, EBay, Skype, Craigslist), the set that have failed are much much larger.
The problem with starting one of these businesses as an entrepreneur is that you basically have to get up the adoption curve before any rational VC will think about investing in you. Sure, if it works out, these businesses can have phenomenal network effects, but in advance of user adoption, it is nearly impossible to quantify the adoption risk in any way, and so it becomes a very very hard sell to VCs. Even if one partner believes that service will be adopted, he / she cannot convince the rest of the partnership with any data. As such, the few of these kinds of companies that get funded tend to either get funded because of a celebrity entrepreneur, or because of bubble-investing mania.
Basically, if you don’t have a track record and are starting a Web 2.0 company which requires a critical mass of users to do something that there is little evidence of people on the web doing to date, then you’re either going to have to bootstrap it for a while, give VCs some other proxy to go on (celebrity entrepreneur, core technology development), or find an individual angel who believes (easier said than done).
The flip side of this is that entrepreneurs who are doing hard-core technology development with relatively deterministic value tend to look at the successful businesses in social networks / P2P with tremendous envy. The latter seem to have unbreakable monopolies, organic growth, and no complex development requirements. However, this is just survivor bias at work. The odds of complete failure in the social / P2P businesses is much higher, which is not obvious just by looking at the winners.