Big VC Turning Down Public Funds To Keep Records Private

from the here-comes-the-fallout dept

And so it begins. There had been some debate over whether or not something like this would happen. While the general consensus among the VC community seemed to be that forcing the public disclosure of VC fund performance via any organization investing publicly controlled money was a bad thing, not everyone was sure if VCs would turn away such money. Now they have. Sequoia - one of the best known top tier firms has told the University of California that they won't take their money because they want to avoid having their returns made public. This isn't for pennies either. Sequoia has had a 22-year relationship with UC, investing over $100 million. which has been tremendously profitable for both sides. I can certainly see where they're coming from. The simple fact is that by revealing portfolio returns, the VC funds are going to be forced to be judged on the wrong criteria - such as quarterly returns, which make no sense in the VC world. Furthermore, since most of the numbers (especially in the early years) are based on markets that are not liquid, the numbers are basically guesses at current value - but have no actual meaning. If everyone who saw those numbers had a deep understanding of how venture capital worked, it wouldn't be such a big deal. Unfortunately, most people don't, and the likelihood of these numbers being misinterpreted in a way that makes it more difficult for a VC to do his or her (ok, mostly his) job, makes working with any public institution too much of a hassle. This is bad news for just about everyone involved - especially those who have their pension money invested in a public institution.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread



Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.