Subject: Re: So... Re: offering pre-purchases
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:49:21 +0900

Thomas Lord writes:

 > They either get the generalized characteristics of the topology of
 > the dynamic design-space state of software -- or they don't.  If
 > they get it, they'll fit financing models to it.

Why?  What's in it for them?  My whole point is that I haven't seen
anything that plausibly gives them as good returns as the business
they're currently in.

Remember, the VCs don't care about the topology of software; they only
really care about the distribution of the random variable called
"ROI".  You need to show them that understanding the topology gives
them better distributions of ROI.

 > There are a few VCs who really "get" software but they tend also to
 > be cynics who are mining veins that few see

Well, that's what VCs are there for.  After all, if the win is really
repeatable, where's the "venture"?

Indeed, I recognize the potential circularity here: "we don't look for
repeatability because we've not found it yet, and we don't find
repeatability because we don't look for it."  However, we're talking
about VCs.  There *are* organizations which have managed to (to some
extent) institutionalize repeatability: Bell Labs, Xerox PARC, IBM,
and in a different field the game companies.  Maybe the
"repeatability" field just has too big an ante for your typical VC.
And that would break the circle.