Who wins and loses from AngelList?
A few weeks ago, I wrote a post with the title “The heterogeneity in the homogeneity”.
In the post, I shared AngelList as an example of a company that succeeds by appealing to a subset of people in a specific group even though it doesn’t appeal to most people in the group. In the specific case of AngelList, some great individual angel investors benefit from sharing the best startups they discover by leading AngelList syndicates, while most institutional investors are either neutral towards or lose from the marketplace.
Louis Coppey from Point Nine Capital recently wrote a post which does a great job in further specifying exactly which investors benefit from using AngelList, who these investors are partially replacing, and which investors are currently neutral to the platform.
Louis argues and I agree that strong individual angel investors like Gil Penchina and Jason Calacanis benefit from AngelList, their syndicates partially replace the allocations of second-tier VC’s who used to serve as follower investors in rounds led by top-tier VC’s, and the top-tier VC’s who continue to lead most investment rounds where a part of that round is syndicated on AngelList are neutral to the marketplace.
You can read Louis’ full post here.
Originally published at Thoughts of a VC.