大众筹资对撼风险投资

    眼下，大众筹资风头正劲。不过，即使最近获得美国证券交易委员会（SEC）认可的那种大众筹资方式也存在执行上的风险。作为一种金融生态系统，大众筹资刚刚起步，但一些参与者已经开始向风险投资叫板，认为后者应该“使出更厉害的招数”。原因是，对现有公司和风投模式本身来说，其他融资途径已经带来了威胁和竞争。我认为在大众筹资和风险投资之间进行比较并不恰当，主要理由有几条，其中多数都和一个问题有关，那就是和公司创始人合作的风投伙伴到底是优秀还是糟糕。

    在创始人看来，风投总是有好有坏，大众筹资的出现不太可能对此产生影响。不过，我还是在下文中比较了大众筹资和风险投资的异同（前提是，假定风投质量较高，能够真正和管理层实现合作）。

    请注意，我的目的不是专门探讨大众筹资能否在公司起步阶段很好地把握住投资机遇。但我要说，倘若某人的投资主题基本上都建立在人云亦云的基础上，那我就不会对相关资产抱很高的期望。

1. 监督和协助水平

    • 风险投资：高

    • 大众筹资：低

    对年纪较轻的首次创业者来说，我相信资金不可或缺，而和一家大公司的一位大人物合作则价值非凡。不论是作为创业者，作为天使投资人，还是到最后作为风险投资人，我都曾经亲眼见证过这一点。有些创业者欠缺经验，但充满梦想 “有奶便是娘”对他们来说并不是特别好的建议，无论这句话出自何人之口。我认为这样的说法更多地只会让人感到自负，想逞能，对于打造一家能持久运转、长期盈利的企业而言并不是最好的建议。

    反对者会说：“噢，你说的不就是你书里的内容嘛。”对此我的回答是，找到一个考虑周全的论点后再来找我，别老是说这一套。我还知道，许多创业者在融资财团内外找了大量顾问，但我认为这种顾问关系不能取代风投操作人和创业者之间的关系，原因是风投操作人和创业者在利益和风险方面高度一致。

2. 稳定性

    • 风险投资：高

    • 大众筹资：低

    就我的亲身体验而言，大多数萌芽期企业在建立之后都还没有“自立，找到正确的”发展方向。它们都需要一段时间来完成产品与市场的磨合；更重要的是，它们需要时间来找到一种可扩展、可复制的产品销售方法。这段时间总是比预期的要长，会带来额外的资金需求，而且数额往往还会超过初创型企业持有的资金。

    因此，在纯粹的天使投资环境（也包括大众筹资环境，即表面上没有任何措施来承担弥补资金缺口的责任并提供相应资源）中，经常出现的情况要么是耗费时间，要么是在达到A轮投资指标前无法满足这样的额外资金需求。此时，一位支持型风投伙伴能帮助创业团队把注意力集中在执行方面。途径是注入足够的资金，以便后者在运营方面实现里程碑式发展，从而达到A轮投资者的期望——当然，这只是支持型风投伙伴帮助创业团队的方法之一。同时，这样的协助一般都能相当迅速而轻松地完成，但必须在信任和支持的氛围下进行。创业者和风投伙伴都要认为这样的过渡性投资既公平又周到，这一点很重要。强有力的风投伙伴每天都会这样做，而且已经成为他们日常生活的一部分。

    Crowdfunding is all the rage. Even the SEC recently blessed one type of crowdfunding for which there was risk of an enforcement action. Several in the early-stage ecosystem have called for venture capitalists to "up their game," as alternative paths to financing create competitive threats to both incumbent firms and the venture model itself. I think drawing parallels between crowdfunding and VC investment is inappropriate -- conflating several important factors, most of which have to do with whether a founder is dealing with a good VC partner or a lousy VC partner.

    There will always be good VCs and bad VCs from a founder perspective, and the presence of crowdfunding is unlikely to impact this phenomenon. That said, here is the compare/contrast as I see it between crowdfunding and VC funding (assuming one is dealing with a quality VC who acts as a true partner with management).

    Please note that I am not looking to specifically address of whether crowdfunding may or may not be a good vehicle for accessing early-stage investment opportunities. I will say, however, that if one's investment thesis generally revolves around the notion of "social proof" than I don't hold high hopes for this corner of the asset class.

1. Mentoring and assistance

    • VC: High

    • Crowdfunding: Low

    With younger first-time founders, I believe money is not fungible and that there is significant value to partnering with a great individual at a great firm. I have personally witnessed this as a founder, as an angel and most recently as a VC. Whoever says that "all money is green" isn't giving the inexperienced yet visionary founder very good advice. I believe this talk is a function more of ego and bravado than really trying to give a founder the best advice for building a sustainable, long term, profitable business.

    Cynics will say "Oh, you're just talking your book." My response: Come back with a thoughtful argument and save the platitudes. I also acknowledge that many founders successfully build a suite of mentors and advisors both inside and outside of their funding syndicates, but I don't see these relationships as a replacement for a VC operator that has interests and exposures closely aligned with those of the founders.

2. Stability

    • VC: High

    • Crowdfunding: Low

    Most seed stage businesses with which I've been involved have not been "up and to the right" propositions from the get-go. It has taken a bunch of time -- invariably more time than expected -- to achieve product/market fit and, more importantly, to figure out a scalable and replicable way to sell the product. And with this extra time comes extra financing requirements, often more than the start-up has on hand.

    Because of this, in purely angel-funded situations (and, by extension, crowdfunded situations where there is no ostensible deal lead with the responsibility and resources to bridge the gap), it frequently is either time consuming or impossible to secure this incremental capital prior to Series A-type metrics being hit. This is only one of the ways where a supportive VC partner can help keep the team focused on execution by injecting enough capital to hit the key operating milestones Series A investors are looking for. And this can generally be done quite quickly and painlessly, but has to be done in an environment of trust and support. It is important that both founders and the VC feel a bridge investment was done fairly and thoughtfully, but this is something that strong VC partners do every day. It's part of life.