Is this really true? seems like the early and late stage guys are doing pretty well raising funds.
- Summit closed 2 funds with a combined 3.2bn in January
- NEA is raising 2.5bn
- AH raised 1.5bn
- General Catalyst is raising around $500m
- Accel has raised Big Data and India funds in the last year
Also from that article: "The dollars raised this year may equal or surpass 2011 levels – but the number of funds managing that capital will almost certainly be less. "
It may be true a lot of follow-on Sand Hill Series B and C guys are struggling, but a lot of them haven't generated returns in forever and should have been out of business years ago. Won't they just get replaced?
And don't founders tend to get the upper hand when capital is easiest to come by and optimism is at its highest?
Also from that article: "The dollars raised this year may equal or surpass 2011 levels – but the number of funds managing that capital will almost certainly be less. "
It may be true a lot of follow-on Sand Hill Series B and C guys are struggling, but a lot of them haven't generated returns in forever and should have been out of business years ago. Won't they just get replaced?
And don't founders tend to get the upper hand when capital is easiest to come by and optimism is at its highest?