| Click for the Finfacts Ireland Portal Homepage |

Finfacts Business News Centre

Home 
 
 News
 Irish
 Irish Economy
 EU Economy
 US Economy
 UK Economy
 Global Economy
 International
 Property
 Innovation
 
 Analysis/Comment
 
 Asia Economy


Finfacts changes from 2015

RSS FEED


How to use our RSS feed

Follow Finfacts on Twitter

 
Web Finfacts

See Search Box lower down this column for searches of Finfacts news pages. Where there may be the odd special character missing from an older page, it's a problem that developed when Interactive Tools upgraded to a new content management system.

Welcome

Finfacts is Ireland's leading business information site and you are in its business news section.

Links

Finfacts Homepage

Irish Share Prices

Euribor Daily Rates

Global Cost of Living

Irish Tax - Income/Corporate

 

Feedback

 

Content Management by interactivetools.com.

News : Innovation Last Updated: Jan 27, 2015 - 8:51 AM


More US VC-backed new companies fail than succeed
By Michael Hennigan, Finfacts founder and editor
Sep 13, 2013 - 8:15 AM

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

Source: Cambridge Associates

Despite the Irish Government's desire to attract US venture capital (VC) firms to Ireland and high-profile successes, including Google and LinkedIn, and the forthcoming Twitter IPO (initial public offering), returns in the US market have been dismal over 20 years. In addition the vaunted J-curve - - an illustration of the common view, that while VC funds lose money early on, returns surge later - - is a myth. Venture capital is the exception as a funding source for startups. More US VC-backed new companies fail than succeed, and since 1999 VC funds have barely broken even while historically, according to Kauffman Foundation, America's leading entrepreneurship think-tank, less than 1% of US companies have raised capital from VCs, and the VC industry is contracting. But less venture capital does not mean less startup capital since non-VC sources of funding, such as angel capital, are growing.

According to Cambridge Associates, in the 10 years to March 31, 2013, annual returns of the main stock indices outperformed VC funds. See chart above and here [pdf].

In July 2010, Brian Cowen, then taoiseach, announced at the New York Stock Exchange a $500m Innovation Fund Ireland for Irish tech companies with half to be subscribed by international investors, in particular VCs and half coming from a public pension fund.

The private investors did not materialise and in the intervening period, the Irish Government itself has actually given up to $200m to 3 international VC firms to invest and the Silicon Valley Bank may have got up to $100m. One of the VCs opened an office in Dublin in 2011.

In Ireland, local VC funds invest in companies employing about 9,000 people and investments are commonly made with Enterprise Ireland, the public agency for indigenous exporters.

Richard Bruton, jobs minister, in March 2012 launched a new fund to again try to attract US VC companies and in an RTÉ interview expressed more optimism about VCs than America's leading entrepreneurship think-tank:

Audio

The '2012 NVCA Yearbook,' which is produced by Thomson Reuters and focuses on the US market, says that for every 100 business plans that come to a venture capital firm for funding, usually only 10 or so get a serious look, and only one ends up being funded.

Some 76% of tech companies acquired in 2012 had not raised institutional investment (VC/PE -private equity) prior to acquisition.

The Kauffman Foundation, which invests some of its endowment in VC firms, has published a research study, 'We Have Met the Enemy … And He is Us,' [pdf] that is based on a comprehensive analysis of the foundation's more than 20 years of experience investing in nearly 100 VC funds. It illustrates a persistent pattern of inflated early returns in funds that may be used to raise subsequent funds and shows the poor historical performance of funds with more than $500m in committed capital.

The foundation currently has $249m of its $1.83bn portfolio allocated to venture.

The research found that of the almost 100 VC funds, including what it says are some of the most notable and exclusive names (confidentiality agreements barred it from naming them), only 20 of them beat a public-market equivalent by more than 3% annually, and half of those started investing before 1995.

Interviews with fund managers and limited partners also suggest that many institutional investors commonly maintain inadequate fiduciary oversight and are anchored to narrative fallacies about the benefits of venture capital as an investment class.

The authors call upon institutional investment committees to require deeper due diligence of VC investments and more rigorous data analysis of VC portfolio performance relative to the public markets. The authors also urge limited partner investors to charge more for providing capital to risk assets by insisting on preferred investment returns before sharing profits with general partners - - as is often the practice with buyout and growth investment firms.

"Investments in venture capital funds should be measured against the naïve alternative investment - - publicly traded small company stocks," said Diane Mulcahy, director of private equity at the Kauffman Foundation and the paper's lead author.

The authors also recommend that foundations, endowments and corporate and state pension funds negotiate investment terms that better align their interests as limited partners with those of the general partners in which they invest.  The report suggests potentially troubling asymmetries between the information required by venture capital funds from portfolio companies and the information they are required to provide to limited partners of the funds.

The foundation found that the most significant excess returns earned from venture capital occurred in funds raised prior to 1996, and those funds averaged $96m in committed capital. Many of those successful funds led managers to raise successively larger funds; which significantly eroded returns and maximized general partner profits through fee-based income at the expense of limited partner success.

"The result is that institutional investors end up paying general partners - - who typically commit only 1% of partner dollars to a new fund while LPs (limited partners) commit the remaining 99% - - quite handsomely to build funds, not build companies," said Mulcahy.

"We believe LPs have a responsibility to fix what's broken in the investment model, and that starts with better information and budget approval rights," added Bradley. "Some insiders cry that not enough venture money is being steered to early-stage companies - - but with six times the capital invested every year this decade than was invested in the entire decade of the 1980s, too much capital is the problem and LPs are not charging enough for that capital."

The report goes on to outline a series of steps the Kauffman Foundation itself will take to correct its approach to venture capital investing. Mulcahy, who manages the Foundation's VC portfolio, said: "We are changing our investment behaviour based on this data; going forward, we expect to be much more selective and disciplined investors in only a handful of VC funds."

It said it will invest in venture funds of less than $400m whose partners have consistently shown they can outperform public markets and who commit at least 5% of the fund’s capital. It also plans to do more direct investing to avoid paying management fees and sharing profits with VCs. And, it plans to shift money from venture capital to the public markets.

  • Only twenty of 100 venture funds generated returns that beat a public-market equivalent by more than 3% annually, and half of those began investing prior to 1995;
  • The majority of funds: sixty-two out of 100, failed to exceed returns available from the public markets, after fees and carry were paid;
  • There is not consistent evidence of a J-curve in venture investing since 1997; the typical Kauffman Foundation venture fund reported peak internal rates of return (IRRs) and investment multiples early in a fund's life (while still in the typical sixty-month investment period), followed by serial fundraising in month twenty-seven;
  • Only four of thirty venture capital funds with committed capital of more than $400m delivered returns better than those available from a publicly traded small cap common stock index;
  • Of eighty-eight venture funds in our sample, sixty-six failed to deliver expected venture rates of return in the first twenty-seven months (prior to serial fundraises). The cumulative effect of fees, carry, and the uneven nature of venture investing ultimately left us with sixty-nine funds (78%) that did not achieve returns sufficient to reward us for patient, expensive, long-term investing.

Check out our subscription service, Finfacts Premium , at a low annual charge of €25

Related Articles


© Copyright 2015 by Finfacts.ie

Top of Page

Innovation
Latest Headlines
Digital Taylorism: Amazon's chief rejects depiction of "soulless, dystopian workplace"
Most surviving startups do not grow; Tiny number powers jobs engine
Despite euro dip China & US remain most competitive manufacturing nations
Business startup rates up in most OECD countries led by Australia and UK
NASA's Kepler mission has confirmed the first near-Earth-size planet
Energy subsidies at 6.5% of global GDP; Commodity prices to remain weak
US startups rely on personal savings, debt; Venture capital funds less than 1%
Europe produces 13 $1bn+ "unicorn" startups in one year; London is Europe's digital capital
Irish-based firms raised €120m in VC funding in Q1 2015; Some top recipients Irish for tax purposes
Ireland: Fourth highest 25-34 year old ratio of third-level graduates in developed world: So what?
Business dynamism/ employer firm startups in US secular decline
Innovation Union Scoreboard 2015: Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Germany are on top
Education systems failing to provide students with skills for success in 21st century
US, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland have best higher education systems
Handbook of Service Innovation: Ireland moving up the value chain?
Switzerland revives silk industry that thrived for two centuries
Sales of Irish tech firms create 300 millionaires in 15 years and no scaleups
Apple warns of 'material' tax payments from EU's Irish tax investigation
Apple earnings surge 33% on higher price and iPhone sales jump in China
Big Pharma's internationalisation of R&D to China
The dangers of romanticising entrepreneurs despite key role
UK and Irish business R&D heavily reliant on foreign-owned firms
Silicon Valley and the development of the silicon microchip - Part 2
Ireland: Innovation with or without R&D/ scientific breakthroughs
UK government most open/ transparent in world; Ireland & Greece lowest ranking in Europe
10 questions about Switzerland's Solar Impulse aircraft – answered
Silicon Valley loses its silicon; Typical household income stagnates - Part 1
21st century skills are 18 century skills + a computer
Growing ICT sector in Europe accounts for 5% of employment
Should Ireland copy Singapore's scientific research investment plan?
Startups vs Scaleups: 4% of UK startups have 10+ employees 10 years later
Irish patent filings at European Patent Office fell in 2014
Facebook's maze of privacy settings maybe in breach of European law
Apple to invest €1.7bn in Irish and Danish data centres
Silicon Valley insider warns of dodgy $1bn valuations of private companies
Israel's Startup Nation not a jobs engine; Nor is Irish high tech
Established industries often beat new technology investment returns
Ireland: Noonan said EU to drop Apple tax case; Now expects court case
Irish R&D Tax Credit: No evidence of rising business innovation; Facts don't matter
Apple reports biggest profit of a public company in history