You know the funny thing is I started this post trying to be cautiously positive. Nothing I said initially was meant to detract anything that ATA has done except to maybe say “let’s talk about how long it should take to do deals”. You could have taken the very reasonable approach that Stephen took and say “hey, let me see if I can fix this”. Instead, you took the approach of bringing in issues that weren’t relevant and be antagonistic towards myself and the local community.

This, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with fund raising in Atlanta.

That’s it. I’m done with this thread. Feel free to have the last laugh and last comment. I’m not posting on this thread anymore. I feel like I’m arguing with a brick wall and I know my time is better spent elsewhere. If only all local “angels” felt like they could add more value by working with companies they invested in instead of being in a flame war on a blog, we’d not have this discussion in the first place.

I would indeed welcome a local Y-Combinator type fund in Atlanta. Additional capital within Atlanta has been one of our missions since 1998. You might see a Y-Combinator fund (or QuickStart, etc) as competition for ATA. I see it as a more early stage capital for the market.

Also, I’m glad you admitted that you already knew the result from the Digital Envoy exit and your question was posed just to antagonize. Like I said, those who know me know what I think about the exit and what happened. Mind you, I left Digital Envoy in 2005 and remained only a board member and not a member of management. I was totally aligned with the angel investors but unfortunately that wasn’t enough at the end of the day. The behavior (good and bad) of individuals and firms in the exit will be remembered by everyone, especially me. But like I said, ATA was never involved in the funding and that wasn’t what this post was about nor did I ever say anything critical of any individual angel investor in my post or followups.

You can continue to read whatever you want to into what I’ve written but the plain facts are what you are implying I said, I didn’t. And the question you posed was merely to antagonize. If that’s what you think are helpful to the community and entrepreneurs in general, then good luck to you.

I could throw in a barb at this point about what you thought about a group of local folks starting a local Y-Combinator type firm but I think I’ve made my point.

I also think what happened to the angels at the Digital Envoy exit is an important lesson for angels everywhere.

I’m actually looking forward to co-investing with the Edison Fund. I wish it the best!

Knox - long comment, I’ll try to respond to everything but feel free to re-comment if I miss something. BTW, I don’t drink coffee or espresso.

1) Returns for DE’s angels really wasn’t the issue or subject of the post. You already know the answer (based on how you asked it) and so the question was meant to antagonize me. If you’re going to antagonize entrepreneurs or people trying to start a discussion, you aren’t helping. I won’t say anything further on the issue but people who know me know what I think about the DE exit.

2) This is why I said it’s been a long time since I raised money. Perhaps you should re-read the post above.

3) I wasn’t dinging you on the PR stuff. In fact, some local companies should do more. See my previous posts on this subject. More attention to our neck of the woods is a good thing.

4) Sounds like you’re worried about a little competition from the Edison Fund. Hopefully this competition will spur some changes in the capital markets in Atlanta.

5) More information is a good thing. Maybe not for those who hold the purse strings but it is for those of us who are starting companies and creating value.

6) Funny you end on antagonizing when your first question was meant in just that way. So what was it again that you said I should do?

Newer stuff is available on my blog and on the filesharing site linked above. I’ll keep hammering on the GT side.

First, if I had invested in Digital Envoy as an angel investor in 1999, what would have been my return as an “angel” investor when the company sold? (not as a VC or part of the carve out for the management team)
4X?
3X
Less than 1X?

Second, the market changes Sanjay. 1999/2001 was a long, long, long time ago.

Third, part of the work I do as a BOD member of the Angel Capital Association is to help bring awareness of this type of investing. That’s why you see a “double Knox”. As you promote on your blog, I am trying to bring “accessibity” to information about angel investing and to also promote angel investing “successes” on a local and national scale. Helping do that nationally and locally is part of what I do for ACA.

Fourth, the Edison Fund is a 501 c3, non-profit fund. Not having to report to an LP who expects a “higher than average” return makes for a quicker investment decision!

Fifth, sure I rag on Adeo. He loves the controversy. He and I are hopefully scheduled to talk in a week or so. Yes, I do think his site instills fear–which I do not think is healthy. But, that is Adeo’s choice to make.

Last, the relationship between an entrepreneur and an investor(s) should be a trusting, working relationship–not an antagonistic one. If an entrepreneur thinks a potential investor is “wasting their time”, they should walk away. If I think an entrepreneur is speaking out of the side of his mouth, I’d walk away. I have before!

I could go on, but you are always welcome to call or email, Sanjay.