There are so many things that are wrong with this thinking that it’s hard to choose where to start, but I’ll jump in with the one point I agree on. Investors, whether angels or seasoned VC’s should not invest unless they’re ready and equipped to support the company in more ways than simply extending their networks. Beyond that, the rest of this is garbage. Let’s first tackle the easy one, the perceived conflict. There is a thing called corporate governance that addresses this. Disclose your investment and recuse from decisioning. Are we suggesting experts in marketing shouldn’t invest in martech they believe in? CIO’s shouldn’t invest in enablement tech or business applications they feel will be transformative? CEO’s shouldn’t… well you get the point. Next, the point suggesting that the best way for security leaders to support technologies they believe in is to buy it at full price? You sound more like an obedient shill to the VC community, not a recovering VC. “Just pay full pop on an emerging tech!”. The stage at which a company might attract an “angel”, is generally a stage where design partnerships, support in product positioning, and finding right sized companies willing (because they see potential) to incubate are needed, not a moment to pay full pop that you might not realize full value from in a year or longer. There is so much more nonsense in this piece, but I’m out of energy, this was exhausting to read.
There are so many things that are wrong with this thinking that it’s hard to choose where to start, but I’ll jump in with the one point I agree on. Investors, whether angels or seasoned VC’s should not invest unless they’re ready and equipped to support the company in more ways than simply extending their networks. Beyond that, the rest of this is garbage. Let’s first tackle the easy one, the perceived conflict. There is a thing called corporate governance that addresses this. Disclose your investment and recuse from decisioning. Are we suggesting experts in marketing shouldn’t invest in martech they believe in? CIO’s shouldn’t invest in enablement tech or business applications they feel will be transformative? CEO’s shouldn’t… well you get the point. Next, the point suggesting that the best way for security leaders to support technologies they believe in is to buy it at full price? You sound more like an obedient shill to the VC community, not a recovering VC. “Just pay full pop on an emerging tech!”. The stage at which a company might attract an “angel”, is generally a stage where design partnerships, support in product positioning, and finding right sized companies willing (because they see potential) to incubate are needed, not a moment to pay full pop that you might not realize full value from in a year or longer. There is so much more nonsense in this piece, but I’m out of energy, this was exhausting to read.