Replying to both here, I think the success rate among VCs is probably not a good metric.
In a PM to Frank, I referred to the generation of capitalists that emerged from WW II, and the highly-developed relationship between industry and government.
I don't know what your respective reactions are, but to me that relationship resembled in many ways the "command economies" that have taken leadership positions on the infrastructure side of telecomms.
Specifically, government listened first (but by no means exclusively) to the elites, the experts in telecomms. In that context, government reestablished the proper order of things: telecomms should serve the national and public interest first. Commercial considerations were by no means brushed aside; as we all know, incumbents were enlisted. Enlisted, but subordinated.
That's one missing element here: a process whose success has been demonstrated recently and historically.
I'd like to discuss other aspects of perceived problems, but time is short. For now, I'm certain you both can think of many possible contributors to what should be a more coherent process.
Jim
[Late edit: Research revealed that many efforts were deemed unproductive boondoggles, wasteful, during the Roosevelt administration's early days. The benefit of many such programs was psychological, rather than economically justified in a nation deeply scarred by depression. We're not there yet, and let's hope we don't see that desperate need again. No matter what is done, there will be some questionable decisions, and we should expect them. But certainly, we should also expect them to be minimized.] |
