Facebook同意以190亿美元的创纪录高价收购移动聊天应用WhatsApp后不久，我问红杉资本（Sequoia Capital）合伙人吉姆•戈茨，为什么只有红杉这唯一一家风投公司对WhatsApp进行了投资。

    吉姆的回答是，因为红杉希望获得WhatsApp公司尽可能多的股权。

    这话听起来似乎平淡无奇，但事实上，这在风险投资界极为罕见。

    绝大多数情况下，像WhatsApp这样的公司，等到Facebook找上门时，应该已经有了好几位投资者。以Facebook本身为例，它成立四年时，已经有了八个机构投资者。Twitter也是如此。即便同样是获得红杉资本支持的谷歌（Google），当时也还有一个主要的风险投资者——凯鹏华盈（Kleiner Perkins）。

    有时出现多个投资者反映的是资金需求。不过，大多数情况下，出现多个投资者的根源在于寻求社会认同——能使风险看起来不那么冒险的验证协议。毕竟，别人也愿意进行的投资能有多糟糕？

    比如，大家还记得吗，风投机构Institutional Venture Partners曾经在一篇新闻通稿中书面解释过它去年投资SnapChat的一个理由？

    追随聪明人的投资步伐。Snapchat的早期投资者包括基准资本（Benchmark Capital）和光速创投（Lightspeed Venture Partners），两者都是硅谷的顶级风险投资公司。我们与两家公司都有过合作，对他们两家都钦佩不已。Institutional Venture Partners公司2009年二月与基准资本一道投资了Twitter。这笔投资被证明是我们公司有史以来最成功的投资之一。我们还与基准资本一起投资了MySQL，后者于2008年被太阳计算机系统公司（Sun Microsystems）出资10亿美元收购。

    所谓社会认同会在新创企业融资的各个阶段浮出水面，有时是在种子阶段，尤其是在AngelList这类融资平台上，情况尤为突出；有时是在早期融资阶段，要么是数家机构联合领投，要么是一家牵头，其余跟投。不过，最容易看出社会认同的还是在B轮或是C轮等后续融资阶段。下面是风投机构Rob Go最近发布的一条声明：

    绝大部分风投会在相对早期阶段就购入所投公司的股权。他们会在多轮竞争中不断扩大持股比例。不过，他们也不介意引入新的投资者以证明自己的投资是明智之举。通常，另一家风投会以更高的估值来投资，这就证明了早期投资者的眼光，而且在账面上他也大赚了一笔。而对于各家风投的有限合伙人而言，他们想必会颇为满意，而参与交易的主要合伙人更是面上有光。

    不过红杉资本在投资WhatsApp时没有掉入这个陷阱。他们看到了WhatsApp的美好前景，因而将其它人拒之门外。现在，风险投资史上最赚钱的一笔交易即将发生，红杉资本到了独享成果的时候。其它风投肯定会注意到吧？

    当然，我并非是第一个指出风险投资的社会认同难以为继的人。风险投资家亨特•沃克在大约两年前就发表过类似言论。但是，作为投资策略拿出来点评一下是一回事，正式发表以强调这个观点又是另外一回事了。（财富中文网）

    译者：项航

    Shortly after Facebook (FB) agreed to acquire mobile messaging company WhatsApp for a record $19 billion, I spoke to Sequoia Capital partner Jim Goetz about why Sequoia was the only venture capital firm to have ever invested in WhatsApp.

    To paraphrase Jim's answer: Because Sequoia wanted as much equity in the company as it could get.

    This may sound obvious, but it really is the exception in venture capital circles.

    In almost every other case, a company like WhatsApp would have had multiple investors by the time Facebook came calling. For example, Facebook itself had eight institutional investors by the time it turned four-years-old. Same with Twitter (TWTR). Even Sequoia-backed Google (GOOG) had another major VC backer in Kleiner Perkins.

    Sometimes the multiple investors are a reflection of capital requirements. But, most often, it's rooted in the concept of social proof -- a validation protocol that has the effect of making risk look...well, less risky. After all, how bad could an investment be if someone else is willing to do it too?

    For example, remember what Institutional Venture Partners wrote about one of its reasons to invest in SnapChat last year?

    Follow the Smart Money – Snapchat's early investors include Benchmark Capital and Lightspeed Venture Partners, two of the top venture capital firms in Silicon Valley. We've worked with both firms previously and can't find enough good things to say about each. IVP co-invested in Twitter along side Benchmark in February 2009. That investment has proven to be one of the most successful in the history of our firm. We also co-invested with Benchmark in MySQL, which Sun Microsystems acquired in 2008 for $1 billion.

    Sometimes social proof manifests itself in seed-stage rounds, particularly via online platforms like AngelList. Sometimes it's in early-stage deals, either with co-lead investors or a single lead who brings in other institutions for smaller stakes. But, most often, it's in follow-on rounds like Series B or Series C. Here is how venture capitalist Rob Go recently explained it:

    Most VC's buy their ownership in a company relatively early. They would like to increase it over time in their winners, but they also like getting external validation that they have made a good investment by getting another firm to mark-up their investment. Basically, this means that another VC invests at a higher valuation, making the early VC seem really smart and able to show unrealized gains. This tends to make LPs happy and make the lead partner look good among his or her colleagues.

    But Sequoia didn't fall into this trap on WhatsApp. It saw something great, kept everyone else away and is now reveling in the largest-ever sale of a VC-backed company. This has got to cause other VC firms to take notice. Right?

    To be sure, I'm not the first person to suggest that social proof deserves to be on the run. Venture capitalist Hunter Walk wrote that very thing in this space nearly two years ago. But it's one thing to make investment strategy arguments, and quite another to keep reading about the courage of someone else's convictions.