Web 2.0 Expo and the TechCrunch20 Conference

I spent today at the Web 2.0 Expo and am just stunned at the scale and scope of the event. Let me make one observation to start -- the venue of an event really makes a difference. It sets the tone of the event and sets the stage for the sorts of interactions you are likely to have. So the mere fact that the Web 2.0 Expo is at the Moscone Center says a lot. There are conference center events (Expo, SXSW), there are big hotel events (Etech, Demo), there are fancy hotel events (D: All Things Digital), and there are theater events (TED, Poptech). Each one has a different feel. No one is inherently good or bad. It simply sets the expectations for the conference that is to follow. As you can imagine that there is a different vibe in a fancy hotel conference than in a conference center event.

I took part in a panel today called "Venture Capital 2.0: Bright Future or Broken Forever." It was moderated by Mike Arrington and included some good friends from the investment biz, including Josh Kopelman and Jeff Clavier. It was one of the larger audiences I've spoken in front of before -- I'm guessing there were as many as 800 people in the room. Crazy. Mike tried hard to get the traditional VCs (me included) to fight with the angel guys (Josh and Jeff). His thesis was that angel investors will ultimately get all of the returns because there is so little money required to build a big internet business these days. While it isn't an unreasonable assertion, I obviously disagree whole heartedly. As I've said before, while it is certainly the case that it takes less money for a web startup to demonstrate traction, I believe it still takes significant capital for a successful internet startup to scale. Nonetheless, the entertainment value was high (which was likely Mike's real intention). And we had a great time agreeing with each other and disagreeing with Mike.

Speaking of entertaining, Mike took some time out of our panel to shamelessly plug his new conference, the TechCruch20. The idea behind the conference is to gather some of the most interesting new startups and products, and have them critiqued by a group of smart, entertaining and often-times controversial tech experts. He's already lined up Marc Andreessen, Chris Anderson (Wired Magazine), Mark Cuban, Dave Winer, and, of course, himself and Jason Calacanis (with whom he is organizing the event). The TechCrunch20 is going to take place at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco on September 17th and 18th. I have no doubt that it will be a really entertaining event and look forward to attending. If you're interested in attending as well, I strongly recommend you register sooner rather than later because the conference is already well on its way to sold out (here's a LINK to the official TechCrunch20 website).

Comments

[weblivz]

I pretty much agree with you. I read a short paragraph Wired the other week saying that most startups are out to get bought by one of the big guys (google, ms, apple etc) and few are truly looking to take them on. I think many Web 2.0 companies are about mashup and integration of services from many of these companies (e.g. how many Google Maps spin-offs are there). In this case, you really don't need huge investment - if you really just want to take a gamble on "look how good i am, buy me".

However, there are many companies (i believe - and quite a few in Web 2.0) that want to really take these companies on. I'd guess many in the mobile space (disclaimer - we are working in that area). In this case, angel investment will get you to the platform, but a much bigger investment of experience, cash and connections is needed to go to the next level (if you were to challenge an area of Apple for example, you better move fast!).

This is for example, why we are going as far as we can without investment as i believe the social web gives you a lot of opportunity to validate your ideas as a living prototype - after that investors take more notice (and you have more than an idea as well).

[Fred Wilson]

David,

i posted on this topic last december

http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2006/12/web_20_is_a_gif.html

basically, entrepreneurs can go pretty far on their own or with some small funding from angels. web 2.0 is great for that.

but eventually, if you have a hit on your hands, you are going to have to sell or raise VC (or both).

the slope of the capital consumption curves have changed, largely in favor of the entrepreneurs and possibly in favor of the angels, but the big winners take capital. myspace did, facebook did, skype did, youtube did, twitter will, etc, etc.

it's all good. i think in this case everyone has better economics.

[JohnTerceman]

Hi David,

Heard of Reel.com? It was created by Stuart Skorman who has recently written a book about his life's ventures as a serial entrepreneur. He sold Reel.com to Hollywood Video for $100 million and has since taken part on many other ventures. I would be happy to send you a copy of the book. I thought it would make for a great topic on your blog. Stuart is also available for an interview. If you are interested I will get a media kit and the book in the mail immediately as soon as I have a mailing address. Thanks.

P.S. Sorry, I didn't know how else to contact you.

John Terceman
O'Connell Communications
818-506-1775
oconnellpr@sbcglobal.net

[Brendan]

Hi David,

I attended the panel discussion as well as your "viral" discussion later in the conference. Have to say I was very entertained and appreciated the insight you and your colleagues shared during the VC discussion.

Regards,

Brendan

[Sergio]

Hi David

Here is one more example of what it ´s possible to do with almost none investment.

http://www.mapmyname.com/

I hope you like, and blog it!

Regards