别仇视风险资本家了

    当然，对于“罪有应得”者，亦不必“嘴软”。眼下时兴对风险资本家严加讨伐，一如泡沫言论般如火如荼。笔者的好友兼联合投资人杰里•纽曼在Twitter上发帖如下：

    有些企业家对风险投资家的认识偏执之极。我简直觉得，如果我果真是个混蛋的话，跟这些人沟通起来反而倒容易得多。

    我得说，我完全理解杰里为何发此感慨。事情再简单不过。眼下在企业家圈子里，有关风险资本家的误传和谣言满天飞：“风险资本家混蛋透顶。如果你出于企业发展需要可以接受他们的投资，但千万得跟他们保持距离。他们一有机会就想把你害个半死。当然，更不能相信他们。”

    在企业家给同行的忠告里，没什么比这个更为愚蠢，更为孤陋寡闻的了。我可以非常肯定地证实这一点。而且，我这么说，不仅仅是打趣，而是因为最近在与一家我参与投资的公司打交道时，深切地感受到了上述恐惧与担忧。

    IA Ventures的做法跟我参与管理的所有风险资本公司的做法并无二致，那就是要与被投资公司管理层建立合作伙伴关系，深入一线，了解并参与被投资公司的决策。对于这种行事风格，我们参与投资的公司的创始人几乎无一例外地全盘接受。他们选择我们，不仅由于我们具备充足的专业知识，而且还因为他们认同我们的工作方式。

    但是，有时我们也会遇到这种情形：虽然我们一心认为可以助其一臂之力，但公司创始人对于让我们密切参与公司决策，仍然心存疑虑。尽管我们之间的互动令人愉快，但那都不过是表面的官样文章。我们虽然请求以某些方式提供帮助，但得不到积极回应。也很少有人询问我们对公司决策的意见。那种感觉糟透了，因为我们希望能助其一臂之力，而且我们也有能力为公司增加价值。但是，出于某种莫名其妙的原因，创始人就是不让我们参与。

    事实上，最近发生的一件事表明，原因其实很简单。在一次旨在“消除误会”的交流中，我们发现，这些平生头回创业的创始人从一些资深创始人处得到了忠告：他们不能相信风险资本公司。这里，不被相信的风险资本公司不是单指IA Ventures或我们的联合投资者，而是就风险资本公司总体而言。他们不能为公司增加价值，他们会毁了你，以及所有诸如这般的毫无价值的废话。我们达成投资交易已有一年。这一年里，我们曾竭尽全力突破创始人的保护层，但屡遭拒绝。现在，真相终于大白。我必须说，我简直怒不可遏。

    这些创始人由于少不更事，主动向那些较有阅历的人寻求建议，本在情理之中。说实话，我也会建议他们听取过来人的意见。所以，与其说我的愤怒是针对这些年轻创始人，不如说是指向那些富有经验的老手。这些人仅仅因为个别人或者机构伤害了他们，就将整个风险投资业说得一无是处。尽管前面案例中提到的几位创始人拥有卓越的才华，在过去一年中，几乎完全靠一己之力开创出一片天地，但是，他们本来可以得到值得信赖、积极进取、又有远见卓识的投资者的帮助，却出于恐惧不敢向其求助，这实在是可惜可叹。我将此完全归咎于对风险投资家心怀仇恨的人。

    由于某些人的恶行而对之产生怨恨心理，并且一朝被蛇咬，十年怕井绳，害怕再度与之合作，对此我完全能够理解。但是，如果因此而非难整个行业，那不免以偏盖全到了极点。这类行为带来了惨痛的代价，影响到了相关人员的生存。

    因此，当缺乏经验的创始人前来向你取经，在向他们发出忠告，指出某些人仅仅因为从事某个行业就不值得信任之前，不妨深思熟虑，想想这些话是否在理，又会产生什么影响。我相信，你会发现，这些话不仅有失公允，而且毫无助益，特别是对那些你打算帮助的人——新创始人们。

    本文作者罗杰•艾伦伯格是风险资本公司IA Ventures的创始人和执行合伙人。

    译者：大海

    …just the ones who deserve it. VC bashing, like bubble-talk, is clearly in vogue. A good friend and co-investor of mine, Jerry Neumann, tweeted the following:

    Some entrepreneurs are so paranoid about VCs that I think it would be easier to communicate with them if I actually were an asshole.

    I've gotta say, I completely understand where Jerry is coming from. Quite simply, there is a lot of misinformation and mind games going on among members of the entrepreneurial set that goes something like this: "VCs are a**holes. Take their money if you must but by all means keep them at arm's length. They will try and f*&k you at every turn. And certainly don't trust them."

    This is about the most idiotic and ill-informed advice an entrepreneur could give another. I can tell you for a fact this is true -- not just anecdotally, but because I've recently experienced these precise fears and misgivings with one of my portfolio companies.

    The IA Ventures way, as is the way of all the VCs I choose to work with, is to be partners with management, hands-on and in the trenches. This is almost always extremely well-received by our founders, who specifically seek out our involvement both because of our domain expertise but also our modus operandi.

    But sometimes we run across situations where founders whom we think we can help appear wary of our close involvement. While our interactions are pleasant, they are generally superficial and perfunctory. Requests for ways in which we can be helpful aren't actively responded to. We are seldom asked our opinion about strategic matters. From our perspective it is very frustrating because we want to help and are equipped to add value, but for some inexplicable reason the founders simply won't let us.

    Well, the reason in a recent case is actually quite explainable. In a cathartic "clearing the air" session, it came out that these first-time founders had gotten input from more experienced entrepreneurs indicating that they shouldn't trust VCs. Not IA Ventures and our co-investors, but VCs in general. They can't add value. They will screw you. All the usual general, worthless crap. So after a year of being in a deal, trying to break through the protective shell of the founders and repeatedly being denied, the truth came out. And I've got to tell you, I am royally pissed off.

    My anger is less at the founders -- they are young, inexperienced and actively solicited input from those more experienced than them, which is exactly what I would have told them to do -- than at the seasoned founders who because of their own tainted experiences with specific people and firms are painting the entire industry in a negative light. While the founders are great and did a really good job over the past year almost completely on their own, it is criminal that they could have received the help of trustworthy, motivated and knowledgable investors but felt afraid to let it happen. And I lay the blame firmly at the feet of the haters.

    I totally get being angry at people because of bad behavior, and sharing concerns about working with specific parties based on actual experience. But to have a holy war against a set of people just because they are members of that set is the worst kind of profiling. And there are very real and tangible costs to such behaviors, which impact actual people's lives.

    So before advising less experienced founders who look up to you not to trust others simply because they work in a given industry, think long and hard about the logic and the impact of those words. Because I think you'll find that they are neither fair nor helpful to anyone, especially those you are supposed to be helping: the founders.

    Roger Ehrenberg is the founder and Managing Partner of IA Ventures