The point is not to stop investing in VC, but stop investing in the subset of VC that doesn’t measure up to your otherwise available investments. (About half the shots).
You can redistribute the same amount of money into the other (better) half.
Absolutely. But in this case the author claims he does know which half. That’s what the whole paper is really about: figuring out which half. (Not saying you have to agree with him)
Comments
The point is not to stop investing in VC, but stop investing in the subset of VC that doesn’t measure up to your otherwise available investments. (About half the shots).
You can redistribute the same amount of money into the other (better) half.
I think this is missing the desired return for the risk adjusted trees.
Reminds me of the old advertising saying about knowing half the advertising they do is useless, but they have no idea which half.
Absolutely. But in this case the author claims he does know which half. That’s what the whole paper is really about: figuring out which half. (Not saying you have to agree with him)