Comments on: New York Venture Firms: Bigger Fund or Bigger Buzz?

By: Where are NYC Startups and Who is Funding Them? | StartupAlley

Where are NYC Startups and Who is Funding Them? | StartupAlley — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 15:16:45 +0000

[...] of you enjoyed my post a few weeks ago on buzz and fund size among NYC venture firms. But why not take it further? Why not use all the data in Crunchbase of financings of NYC companies [...]

By: Finance Geek » Where Are NYC’s Startups and Who Is Funding Them?

Finance Geek » Where Are NYC’s Startups and Who Is Funding Them? — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 00:06:58 +0000

[...] of you enjoyed my post a few weeks ago on buzz and fund size among NYC venture firms. But why not take it further? Why not use all the data on Crunchbase of financings of NYC companies [...]

By: New York City Venture Capital Financings

New York City Venture Capital Financings — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 19:20:32 +0000

[...] of you enjoyed my post a few weeks ago on buzz and fund size among NYC venture firms. But why not take it further? Why not use all the data on Crunchbase of financings of NYC companies [...]

By: tomloverro

tomloverro — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:34:40 +0000

Brad,
Thanks for the responses. Yeah, I think you used the right number for Insight then. Bessemer is probably very light if you just took the add-on vehicle.

One other graphic / data point that could be interesting would be number of deals/firm done in the NYC area. You can probably get most of the data off the VC websites. (Also, I bet most of the firms on that list would be willing to volunteer it if you asked and you would get more complete data.) Isn’t that one of the most important measures of being a “NYC VC”? Doing deals in the NYC-area?

[BTW, I would not limit NYC just to the five boroughs, but include a reasonable drive's distance. I think this is one of the reasons NYC VC numbers sometimes are deflated. They often exclude companies and $ from a stone's throw away in NJ and CT, but meanwhile CA defines the Bay Area as CA minus north of Eureka and south of LA ]

By: Brad Hargreaves

Brad Hargreaves — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:57:54 +0000

@Jay Levy First dozen firms that came to mind, really. If I had known how many annoyed emails / tweets I would get I would've been a lot more rigorous.

By: Jay Levy

Jay Levy — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 01:04:34 +0000

Brad –

How did you pick the funds you wanted to graph in this? Zelkova isnt on there, we are one of the more active early stage funds in NY. About 16 deals in the past two years.

By: Brad Hargreaves

Brad Hargreaves — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:31:19 +0000

@Craig Probably really high. But I wanted to focus this analysis primarily on old-school VC firms, with one alternative model (Betaworks) thrown in to boot. It's hardly an exhaustive analysis. My own firm, Tipping Point Partners, isn't even included. @Joe Entrepreneur Oops.

By: Joe Entrepreneur

Joe Entrepreneur — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:29:37 +0000

@Brad Hargreaves Rho does do pre-revenue and early revenue deals.

By: Craig

Craig — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:44:37 +0000

…Also, I’d love to see which funds have driven (or are projected to drive) the most returns versus buzz

By: Craig

Craig — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:25:14 +0000

I wonder where Founder’s Collective ranks in Buzz – considering Chris Dixons efforts…?

By: Brad Hargreaves

Brad Hargreaves — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:22:12 +0000

@Joe Entrepreneur I tried to only include firms that do early stage (companies with <$1MM in revenue / yr) deals. Otherwise you starting getting into the netherworld between private equity and VC, and that would make my analysis a bit less interesting. That said, I may be wrong to put Rho in this pot. But I've always assumed they were focused on growth stage.

By: Joe Entrepreneur

Joe Entrepreneur — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:51:06 +0000

Why isn’t Rho Ventures included in this list – they are managing almost $2 billion dollars and their last fund was almost $600m raised in 2007…