[Cryptography] A post-spy world

[Alfie John]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014, at 01:54 PM, z9wahqvh wrote:
> your own quotation notes that IQT says "our model is unique." "unique"
> because they do not consider themselves a venture firm. that same
> paragraph (read whole thing at https://www.iqt.org/about-iqt/) ends:
> "for each dollar that IQT invests in a company, the venture capital
> community invests more than nine dollars." clearly, IQT does not see
> itself as part of the VC community.

IQT aren't a charity. If they are not taking equity or profits, then
they are wanting something else. From more reading, it looks like what
they do is provide funding to companies that have interesting products,
and pay to re-purpose for in-house use.

In other words, they are more like a high-valued customer that want for
heavy customisation. Perhaps this is an easier way to get shit done
rather than go through the request for tenders route.

> the reasons for this look relatively straightforward: IQT is a not-for-
> profit, and VC is built exclusively around making direct financial
> profit from its investment. a not-for-profit VC is almost a
> contradiction in terms, since "profit" and "venture" in this context
> mean almost the same thing.
>
> Practically, VCs have, as a rule, a hands-off if perhaps mentorly
> relationship with their investments. that page makes clear that IQT
> gets directly involved with their partner companies, probably
> including technologists and technologies.

I'm not sure which VCs you're talking about. Besides a seed round, most
VCs will want at least one seats on the board for control. Definitely
not hands-off.

> i am not endorsing what IQT does, or the correctness of Mr Geer's
> statements, and I have no remote connection with any of the parties or
> their services, but am very interested in the record being kept clear.

And I'm all for that too. That's why I made the comment.

Alfie

-- 
  Alfie John
  alfiej at fastmail.fm