Mathew Ingram
is puzzled by Gather.com's ability to raise $6-million in venture
equity from a group of investors that includes Lotus founder ex-Lotus CEO Jim Manzi.
Mathew points out there is little to distinguish Gather.com from the
growing number of Web start-ups attempting to create sites where
contributors provide the content. Gather.com epitomizes what I
increasingly see as a troubling Web 2.0 trend in which VCs jump on
start-ups amid the fear of missing out on the action. There are simply
too many multi-million financing deals being done these days involving
start-ups with no competitive edge and/or viable business models. It's
almost as if the irrational days of the dot-com era have come back. You
tell me how VCs can justify investing in calendar start-ups or RSS
readers, for example, where there appears to be no way to actually
generate revenue. Let's be perfectly clear here about how the VC
process works. It's not rocket science and there are no formulas for
success. Investing in start-ups often hinges on a gut feel or a
personal relationship or backing an entrepreneur who has done it once
before (which is no guarantee of hitting it big again). If a VC makes
10 investments, and one is a huge success and two or three others do
okay, the VC can sleep well at night. This means seven other
investments completely blow up but that's okay if you can find a gem or
two. That said, some of the deals being announced these days do not
appear to have any gem-potential. It appears more like bandwagon
jumping by VCs afraid of looking bad, which is not a reason to invest
in high-risk start-ups.Update: Newsome.org has some disparaging things to say about Gather.com as does Steve Rubel, who believes a Web 2.0 crash is coming.