 |
Amanda Tivali
Los Angeles, California, United States
Investor
Member since: November 09, 2007
Los Angeles, California, United States
Investor
Member since: November 09, 2007
About Amanda
Investor
| Accredited | Yes |
Amanda's connections (1)
Amanda's comments (5)
-
Your examples are so enlightning. You mentioned that if a founder ends up with less than 20% stake upon exit, the venture capitalists are likely to get more than the founder. What's the average stake of a founder upon exit? In other words, on average, is it the founder or the venture capitalists that come up on top of the food chain?
on Reforming venture capitalism (September 21, 2008)
-
It is very refreshing to see an entrepreneur as energetic and candor as you are. I must say that you're inspiring. Having said that, I don't necessarily agree with you on your (softly implied conclusion), especially about The Long Tail. There is plenty of evidence that there has been, and will continue to be, profits to be made in The Long Tail. Nonetheless, I do recognize that the point of your post is more about whether or not we ought to take a risk by rushing or be cautious by holding back. On that point, considering the bust of 2000, I would rather vote for cautious.
on OOPS!! The Proof is not in the Pudding! (July 29, 2008)
-
I remember reading your white paper on viral marketing best practices that I believe you originally published at Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA). I think one important point that you did not mention in this post about the "message" is the fact that the message must be genuine and not deceiving, and thus adheres to the rules of ethics established by WOMMA. Considering your involvement with WOMMA, I was surprised that your post failed to mention this important point. In other words, deceiving types of viral campaigns must be avoided. As I am sure you're aware, many marketers tend to abuse the system and screw it up to all those who wish to play it straight. Even though you make some excellent points and your post is quite elaborate, yet, I feel that it invites abuse by those who tend to be abusers.
on What’s luck got to do with it?!! (July 29, 2008)
-
Very insightful. Now that you put it the way you did, I can now better understand why I was successful in raising money in one network and failed in another. In one network, I had a personal contact who championed our cause and it worked well. However, I wasn't able to raise as much money as I think you raised at Clupedia. Nonetheless, it was a very similar experience. As far as going back to the same well, I totally agree with you.
on The anatomy of angel networks (July 17, 2008)
-
Peter Gonzales (the previous commentator), must be a VC - typically cynical. The man is right and his argument do make sense, but can he be a bit compassionate?! Gee, the product is only probably few weeks old and the company probably has zero marketing budget. Don't you think they deserve a bit of a break here!
Also, do I hear a bit of sarcacism with Peter's "Good Luck" ending? I wouldn't bet against Clupedia because a week ago they were under the radar screen and now they are at the top everywhere. I doubt that this kind of traction is accidental. Looking at their web site, they seem to be pretty marketing savvy. I wouldn't be surprised if they have already figured out the chicken & egg problem that Peter pointed out.
Personally, I think the pitch was very effective and I love the idea of clues from crowds. I had a bit of difficulty sometimes understanding the CEO because of his accent, but otherwise, I think it was just fine.
BTW, where's your pitch Peter? Or are we only into Monday Morning Quaterbacking?!!!
BTW, I have no connection with Clupedia, I just don't like VCs who think they know it all.
on Clupedia - Clues from Crowds (November 20, 2007)
No main document uploaded yet.
User playlist
No content has been added yet.
