Regarding investors: I think you're describing a quality issue, rather than a subject matter problem. Many investors used to be entrepreneurs (mine were) and were massively successful. Starting entrepreneurs can learn a ton from these guys and they are pure gold every step of the way.
Then you get angel investors who got rich through some other means. e.g. through inheritance or stock options in a company they had nothing to do with starting or running. These are often to be avoided for two reasons. 1. They want to be the CEO they never were - in your company. 2. They have no experience or knowledge about creating and building a business beyond what they read online.
What makes it worse is that they and the entrepreneurs they invest in see their wealth as qualifying them to advise or participate in the business. Avoid these guys as speakers at events and as investors.
There is a third class that I've neglected to mention. Super-angels or experienced VC's can also be very helpful through their extensive dealings with other companies they've invested in, often in your space. Super-angels who are former entrepreneurs are the absolute best early stage investors.
ps: Greetings from a fellow South African. [based in the US]
Thanks for the insight, yeah I agree totally. I'm sure there are a number of VC's/Angels worth listening to but the vast majority of them don't know what they're talking about imho.
I'm sure there are a number of VC's/Angels worth listening to but the vast majority of them don't know what they're talking about imho.
If you mean in the South African context, then you are probably right. Has South Africa produced any notable software startup successes? Vinny Lingam got some press for that Yola/Synthesite app, but that's it (Shuttleworth doesn't fit in this category since he made money by selling his CA).
It's one of the concerns I have with Google Umbono as well - how well can the angels recognise potential for success if they haven't had any themselves?
I see a lot of cargo-cultism, but something is missing.
"It's one of the concerns I have with Google Umbono as well - how well can the angels recognise potential for success if they haven't had any themselves?"
Wait, how do you know which angel investors are involved? On their website, they wrote "We will not be publicizing the names and details of our Angel investors without their express permission. A typical Angel with Umbono will be a tech savvy entrepreneur with an established track record in the industry."
Regarding investors: I think you're describing a quality issue, rather than a subject matter problem. Many investors used to be entrepreneurs (mine were) and were massively successful. Starting entrepreneurs can learn a ton from these guys and they are pure gold every step of the way.
Then you get angel investors who got rich through some other means. e.g. through inheritance or stock options in a company they had nothing to do with starting or running. These are often to be avoided for two reasons. 1. They want to be the CEO they never were - in your company. 2. They have no experience or knowledge about creating and building a business beyond what they read online.
What makes it worse is that they and the entrepreneurs they invest in see their wealth as qualifying them to advise or participate in the business. Avoid these guys as speakers at events and as investors.
There is a third class that I've neglected to mention. Super-angels or experienced VC's can also be very helpful through their extensive dealings with other companies they've invested in, often in your space. Super-angels who are former entrepreneurs are the absolute best early stage investors.
ps: Greetings from a fellow South African. [based in the US]