I read that article and I wish I hadn't. It was an intended take down article but didn't really do provide any take down and missed the mark on describing the scene properly. It also offered some kind of palace intrigue but really we received a lot of background and long poor build up for an article circling around one paraphrased comment and then some grand conclusions drawn from that that one moment that author can't even remember clearly.
Also - using soylent, oculus and crypto to paint Andreesen as a bad investor (0 for 3 as he says) is a weird take. Come on - do better if your going to try and take my time.
FWIW I am impartial to VC and A16z but if your going to take a shot, you can do much better than that.
Also - using soylent, oculus and crypto to paint Andreesen as a bad investor (0 for 3 as he says) is a weird take. Come on - do better if your going to try and take my time.
FWIW I am impartial to VC and A16z but if your going to take a shot, you can do much better than that.