風險投資家願意把錢投給誰
Venture capitalists are entrepreneurship’s avant-garde. Their commercial antennas are developed through their access to companies very early in their evolution. They make multiple bets and hope enough succeed in order to deliver market-beating returns to their investors. Their skill often lies in judging the founders of the businesses they assess.
風險投資家是創業先鋒。他們在企業發展的初期就與企業接觸，由此磨練出商業悟性。他們多重押注，期待有足夠多的企業獲得成功，爲投資者帶來高於市場的回報。他們的技巧往往來自對企業創始人的判斷。
They are busy at the moment, having completed more than 4,000 deals in the US alone last year, according to the National Venture Capital Association, and attracting the highest level of investment in more than a decade. As they undertake more deals, and more investment, they also attract criticism — notably for being disproportionately male.
從美國國家風險投資協會(National Venture Capital Association)的數據看，如今風投家們忙得很，去年僅在美國就完成了超過4000筆交易，並吸引了10多年來最高水平的投資。隨着他們接手的交易越來越多，籌集到的投資也越來越多，他們也招致一些批評——特別是男性比例過高。
We should listen, therefore, when Silicon Valley technology investors tell us what a decade’s experience reveals. Early-stage investor First Round Capital has published the findings of a review of its first 10 years. It looked at the 300 companies and 600 founders it has invested in, removed one huge outlier (Uber) from the data, and assessed how much their value had changed between its initial investment and at exit, or now.
因此，當硅谷的科技行業投資者講述他們10年來的心得體會時，我們應該好好聽一聽。早期投資機構First Round Capital近來發表了回首創立頭10年的種種發現。它回顧了投資過的300家公司和600名創始人，從數據中剔除一個巨大的異常值——優步(Uber)，然後評估各企業的價值從初始投資到退出投資時（或當前）的變化。
There were some deeply unsurprising findings (going to a great university helps; technology matters more in business-to-business than to consumer companies; a founder who has worked at Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple or Google is a plus). But it also came up with some data that upset a number of early-stage investing precepts.
他們總結出的發現有一些在深層次上不足爲奇——進一所頂級大學會有幫助；比起消費者企業，技術對B2B企業更重要；在推特(Twitter)、Facebook、微軟(Microsoft)、蘋果(Apple)或谷歌(Google)的工作經驗對創始人是個有利條件。不過他們拿出的數據也推翻了好幾條早期投資成見。
It found that the portfolio teams with at least one female founder outperformed all-male founding teams by more than 60 per cent, and that younger teams outperformed older groups. The wisdom that comes from experience did not pay from an investor point of view because the data showed repeat founders performed no better than first-time founders (mostly because initial valuations were higher). Gratifyingly for believers in collective wisdom, however, teams outperformed solo founders by a massive margin.
按照數據，至少有一名女性創始人的投資團隊的績效高於創始人全是男性的團隊60%以上，且年輕團隊表現優於年長團隊。在投資者看來，從經驗汲取的智慧並不能帶來回報，因爲數據顯示連環創業者的表現並未優於初次創業者（主要原因在於連環創業者的初始估值更高）。然而，令集體智慧的信奉者欣慰的是，團隊創業者的績效大大超過單人創業者。
Moreover, companies started outside the main technology hubs of the San Francisco Bay Area and New York performed just as well (or slightly better) from an investor point of view than those within. This is almost certainly because initial valuations in regional businesses were up to 50 per cent lower.
此外，從投資者的視角看，創建於舊金山灣區和紐約以外的公司表現與在這兩個主要技術中心創立的公司相仿（甚至還稍好一點）。這幾乎肯定是因爲其它地方的初創企業初始估值低了50%。
One message from the First Round data appears to be that if you are a founder seeking a high valuation you should be in a known hub and a repeat founder. If you are an investor you should seek out companies with first-time founders and in regions not yet dubbed “silicon” this or that.
從First Round的數據似乎可以得出這樣的見解：如果你是個尋求高估值的創業者，那你需要在著名的創業中心創建企業，而且最好是個連環創業者。如果你是投資者，你應該尋覓初次創業者，而且是在尚未被冠以“某某硅谷”美名的地方。
Another shibboleth put in question by the First Round data, which should cheer those seeking seed investment, relates to how deals were sourced. It has long been assumed that investors are best approached through an introduction by trusted connections. However, in First Round’s portfolio the companies discovered through other channels, such as Twitter or a demo day, outperformed referred companies by just under 60 per cent. Founders making cold approaches did about 23 per cent better. It seems that it really isn’t who you know.
First Round的數據還令人質疑關於如何物色交易的老觀念，這應當使那些尋求種子投資的人感到振奮。人們長期認爲，接洽投資者的最好方法是由可信賴的人脈引薦。然而，在First Round的投資組合中，通過其他渠道（比如Twitter或者演示日）發現的公司的表現要高出受引薦而來的公司近60%。自己找上門的創業者的表現要比受引薦而來的創業者高23%。似乎重要的並不是你認識誰。
Does this mean that if you are a 25-year-old female entrepreneur outside Silicon Valley, with an Ivy League engineering degree, who knows hardly anyone except your co-founder — who by the way worked at Twitter — all will be well in winning early-stage backers?
這是否意味着，如果你是一名年方25，在硅谷以外創業，擁有常青藤盟校的工程學學位的女性，並且除了你的聯合創始人（在Twitter工作過）以外誰也不認識，就會毫無疑問地贏得早期投資者的青睞？
Almost certainly not. As Megan Smith has been pointing out since joining the White House as President Barack Obama’s chief technology officer, only 3 per cent of US venture capital is allocated to start-ups led by women. Of those companies to have achieved coveted unicorn status (private companies with a minimum $1bn valuation) most have all-male boards; women hold only about 6 per cent of unicorn board seats in total in the US.
答案几乎肯定是“不”。就像梅甘史密斯(Megan Smith)加入白宮擔任奧巴馬的首席技術官後一直指出的那樣，美國只有3%的風投資本投給了由女性領導的初創企業。大多數取得令人羨慕的“獨角獸”地位的企業（估值至少10億美元的私有企業）的董事會爲全男性陣容；女性僅佔全美國獨角獸企業董事會席位的6%。
It is highly likely, therefore, that venture capitalists may not be making optimum investment decisions.
因此，風險投資家極有可能沒有做出最優的投資決策。
But using data to inform venture decisions would help both investors and founders. A famously opaque industry should routinely publish more information about a founder’s gender, origin, education and background. To be serious about seed funding those who can, rather than those who usually do, investors should seek out any data that helps make better decisions.
不過，運用數據來啓迪風投決策對投資者和創業者來說均有幫助。一個以不透明出名的產業應定期發佈更多關於創始人性別、出身、教育程度和其他背景的信息。要認真地對那些有能力（而不是通常能夠爭取到投資的人）進行種子投資，投資者應該盡其所能地蒐集有助於更好決策的數據。
