A Quote by Steve Jurvetson

There is no correlation between a weak IPO market and an impact on early-stage VCs. — © Steve Jurvetson
There is no correlation between a weak IPO market and an impact on early-stage VCs.
There is a substantial correlation between an election year and how the market finishes.
There is an excellent correlation between giving society what it wants and making money, and almost no correlation between the desire to make money and how much money one makes.
Now, the impact on export markets - we export about 10 percent of what we produce, so obviously that will probably have some impact on the market. At this point it's too early to determine how much.
There is a correlation between economic inequality and personal violence. The explanation for the correlation isn't completely clear; there are a number of possibilities.
The last 10 to 20 years you’d think that it has been all about VCs making money, because that’s all we hear about. But really it is all about VCs failing and failing to return capital and being f**king idiots. VCs are stupid. They are absolutely stupid. Does anyone want to challenge that statement? Does anyone think that VCs are not stupid?
[There is a] strong correlation between market freedom and lower government corruption -- not terribly surprising, since the effect of increasing regulatory power is to shift 'cheating' from the private to the public sphere.
You don't actually find a strong correlation between- top-line GDP growth and making money in the market. It- it seems like you should. The fastest-growing countries should give you the highest return. They simply don't. But, there's only four of us- that- that believe that story. Everyone else in the world believes that if you grow fast like China, you'll outperform in the stock market.
While our energy efficiency is improving, there is a very high correlation, almost near perfect correlation, between GDP growth, and energy usage.
VCs are used to being the gatekeepers of capital. There's this old narrative of entrepreneurs going hat in hand begging VCs for money. That absolutely is not the world we're in anymore.
Often, there is no correlation between the success of a company's operations and the success of its stock over a few months or even a few years. In the long term, there is a 100 percent correlation between the success of the company and the success of its stock. This disparity is the key to making money; it pays to be patient, and to own successful companies.
Beauty has never been an important topic in the writings of the major psychologists. In fact, for Jung, aesthetics is a weak, early stage of development. He follows the Germanic view that ethics is more important than aesthetics, and he draws a stark contrast between the two. Freud may have written about literature a bit, but an aesthetic sensitivity is not part of his psychology.
When I participate in a Series A deal with VCs, entrepreneur-friendly terms go out the window. VCs remain attached to age-old traditional industry terms. 'Ratchet,' 'carry,' 'vetoes' - you name it.
[Some of the people I'd met] were wonderful people as human beings, and some people were more difficult. I could not see a correlation between their particular genius in playing chess and music and mathematics, etc. ... with human qualities. Some were really good, wonderful people, and some were difficult characters, but there was no clear correlation. But when I met some spiritual masters, [I thought that] there had to be a correlation, and it turned out to be true.
If your business had no risk, you could go get a bank loan and call it a day. VCs like risks - without them, venture capital wouldn't exist. But they need to be risks that VCs are good at assessing and managing.
However, you have to recognize that regulations will never be completely successful and they will always be full of holes. You must constantly be ready to fill new holes. Actually regulation should be kept to a minimum, but there has to be some cooperation between market participants and authorities - as was the case in the early postwar years. The Bank of England was a very successful regulator by cooperating with market participants. This cooperative spirit was broken by the market fundamentalists.
It was very early, and we were still like beta or alpha stage, and so we started receiving a ton of download. The server became overloaded, and that's when I realized that this had a huge market.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!