[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVDmyRxeGCo&list=PLQ-uHSnFig...
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVDmyRxeGCo&list=PLQ-uHSnFig...
They're all high-risk companies which, if you simply linearly project out where they are today, will "default to dying" (to use PG's phrasing). Sophisticated investors bet that they can perceive some X factor about the business, the market, or the founders which will cause the business to actually not achieve the default outcome. Usually they lose these bets. Occasionally they bet that two Stanford gradudate students who know nothing about business will nonetheless figure out a terribly difficult CS problem allowing them to unlock money from an oversaturated low-margin business that every smart analyst correctly believes has no future. If you invest in nine $STARUP_WHICH_FAILED_INGLORIOUSLY and one Google you do very well for yourself.
To misquote the Wire: "All in the game, yo."
The initial seed round gave Homejoy more rocket fuel than was natural. I watched the speech live, and at the time I felt that Homejoy was a Mini with a jet engine. It was imbalanced and was likely to blow up.
So when did HomeJoy stop trying?