ORAggieFan said:

---

Old RV Ag said:

---

ORAggieFan said:

---

I love all these responses when you can't possibly understand what the OP is asking with the incoherent post.

---

Maybe the rest of us are just carrying on a basic VC discussion. OP started with he was sent from the Politics board which basically states everything he says afterward will be incoherent.

---

Except much of the discussion and implications aren't around VC. I say this with experience on both the investing side and being an officer in a company that has taken VC investments.

---

Yes, I know that.

ORAggieFan said:

---

Old RV Ag said:

---

ORAggieFan said:

---

I love all these responses when you can't possibly understand what the OP is asking with the incoherent post.

---

Maybe the rest of us are just carrying on a basic VC discussion. OP started with he was sent from the Politics board which basically states everything he says afterward will be incoherent.

---

Except much of the discussion and implications aren't around VC. I say this with experience on both the investing side and being an officer in a company that has taken VC investments.

---

Generally, if someone asks a question that indicates incorrect underlying assumptions, I try to rephrase the question into something more useful and then answer that instead. Giving a ton of detail on how startup VC works would not address his questions that were focused on activist investors, LBO, turnaround shops, and the like.

Seems contrary to give an intentionally non-responsive answer just because he used a term incorrectly, especially when he was more or less admitting that he doesn't know anything about the topic. That is, from a part of the political spectrum that tends to latch on to catchy phrases like vulture capital regardless of whether they are even puns on the right thing, and that sees all finance as one gigantic, amorphous entity called Wall Street rather than a collection of striving firms with long term economic models and consequences of their own.

Ag with kids said:

---

Casey TableTennis said:

---

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Howdy y'all,

I was sent from the politics board to ask a couple questions. My understanding of venture capitalism is one that isn't exactly positive, where large companies pool resources to take advantage of smaller companies, squeeze them dry, and then allow them to fail. I've never heard of a venture capitalist venture that ended well for the smaller companies, and I was hoping for some insight from those that have likely dealt with them in some way or another. I don't mean to offend or start any malice, to be clear.

Thank y'all in advance!

---

VC provides funding to small and/or emerging companies. These companies have less funding options through banks and public markets, VC helps them. Obviously many don't work out as planned/hoped, but they often would have failed quicker without VC being available in the first place.

You seem to be describing "vulture" capital or LBO markets. These are players in the distressed asset markets where more of what you described occurs.

---

Basically Warren Buffet's career...

---

Nah brah, Buffett is NOT a flipper. Hes a buy low and hold a long long time kinda guy.

https://dealbreaker.com/.amp/2013/02/warren-buffett-levers-his-own-lbo

https://fortune.com/2013/03/05/buffett-heinz-is-not-a-private-equity-deal/amp/