Yes, it's a sample size of 1, however Apple's timeline makes me wonder if the typical 10 year closed-end fund lifecycle is fully optimized.

Principal at Cobalt Ventures. Write @ TheItinerant.io ; BenErsing.com Host: /venturecapital /finance /adventures

Husband | VP Defense Strategy @darkhive | reserve officer @usarmy | lifelong learner & leader | alum @harvardHBS @westpoint_USMA

Its a good question. In general I’d say “no.”

However it's different continuing to hold the asset into public markets v making net new public equity investments.

Today venture firms have different post IPO liquidation policie.

We are also seeing some index funds lunch VC funds (e.g., ARKInvest).

Another way to look at this is if you'd want the same allocator (GP/fund) making public equity investments as you would Seed/A/B?

That's effectively what you'd be advocating for in holding positions past the IPO - if you hold there, you're effectively supporting your venture GP being a public equity trader w/ alpha.

Longer-duration funds are becoming more popular, as are evergreen funds. Pros and cons to each.

What other timeline for return-on-fund  would you propose?

BDFL of Quilibrium, Eng @ Farcaster, ex-Coinbase, always opinionated, never hydrated

/quilibrium

It also reveals what happens when you have aligned investors with way more skin in the game rather than "running a thesis playbook"

I hate how you can’t zoom in on pics in mobile - what is this an infographic for ANTS???