many VCs are working for the sake of making money - good
let's say traditional VC = T-VC
but broken part is TVC can not cover all the social issues
if many people are dying due to the shortage of doctors in countryside clinic - shall T-VC help this financially? - maybe no. because this project does not make IPO.
so, is this project not important? of course this project is important.
then who helps this kind of project? gov? donation? - maybe too weak and slow
how about making some "pool of money" like $100,000 to 200,000 to help such socially important but not money making project?
if that project can be nice test for the possiblity of " loss-making first but hitting break even later " story,
that would have a social impact
daijapan
commented
8 months ago
many VCs are working for the sake of making money - good let's say traditional VC = T-VC but broken part is TVC can not cover all the social issues if many people are dying due to the shortage of doctors in countryside clinic - shall T-VC help this financially? - maybe no. because this project does not make IPO. so, is this project not important? of course this project is important. then who helps this kind of project? gov? donation? - maybe too weak and slow
how about making some "pool of money" like $100,000 to 200,000 to help such socially important but not money making project? if that project can be nice test for the possiblity of " loss-making first but hitting break even later " story, that would have a social impact
多くのVCは金儲けのために働いています。伝統的なVC(T-VC)は金儲けに長けていますが、社会的課題のすべてをカバーすることはできません。 例えば、地方のクリニックで医師不足で人々が亡くなっている場合、T-VCは財政的に支援しないかもしれません。そのプロジェクトはIPOにつながらないからです。
しかしそのプロジェクトは社会的に大切です。政府や寄付だけでは力不足です。そこで、10万ドルから20万ドル程度の「資金プール」を作り、社会的インパクトは大きいが当面赤字のプロジェクトを支援することが考えられます。 将来的に黒字化できる可能性を試す意味でも意義があると思います。
このように、社会課題解決型で即利益を追わないプロジェクトへの支援制度が必要だと考えます。