An interesting topic: what is the essence of investment institutions?



In the traditional impression, VC is just wealthy people pouring money into startups. But if you think about it carefully, a true investment institution is actually a business. This business has its own operational logic, expansion goals, and optimization directions.

Take those leading investment institutions as an example. They are essentially a Firm—a real business entity. The original purpose of its founding was to grow bigger and better. As the scale increases, this operational system becomes more and more refined. But this also means that many characteristics of traditional VCs may not be applicable to these institutions at all.

For example, flexibility, decision-making speed, attention to small projects... These are things you can see in small, boutique funds, but in large investment organizations, they are often smoothed out by processes and systematic regulations. This is not to say it's bad, but every model has its costs.

So next time you observe the actions of an investment institution, don't just look at the money—look at its operational logic—that's what truly determines what it can do and what it cannot do.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 10
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
ForkMongervip
· 01-15 16:36
nah this is just governance theater dressed up in vc jargon. size = ossification, always has been. the real vulnerability is when these mega-firms start treating portfolio as protocol control
Reply0
BlindBoxVictimvip
· 01-15 08:11
Basically, VC firms are also competing fiercely. Large institutions focus only on scaling, which causes them to lose flexibility.
View OriginalReply0
StableNomadvip
· 01-14 07:34
tbh this just reminds me of UST's collapse... funds got too big to pivot fast enough. the bureaucracy kills the upside. statistically speaking, smaller allocators actually outperform on risk-adjusted returns but nobody wants to hear that. not financial advice but—the correlation between fund size and decision paralysis is real.
Reply0
GasSavingMastervip
· 01-12 21:01
It's just comprehensive but not perfect.
View OriginalReply0
SybilAttackVictimvip
· 01-12 21:00
Basically, large institutions have become bureaucratized and can never return to their original flexibility.
View OriginalReply0
retroactive_airdropvip
· 01-12 20:59
That's right, big institutions have just become bureaucratic machines.
View OriginalReply0
MissedAirdropBrovip
· 01-12 20:55
In simple terms, big funds are bureaucratic institutions, while small funds are the real deal.
View OriginalReply0
SelfMadeRuggeevip
· 01-12 20:49
Basically, VC also has to eat, it's not that sacred.
View OriginalReply0
ParallelChainMaxivip
· 01-12 20:43
Well said, the big fund is just a variant of a bureaucratic organization.
View OriginalReply0
OldLeekConfessionvip
· 01-12 20:35
Large institutions are bureaucratic organizations; no matter how much money is invested, they cannot fix the problem of slow decision-making.
View OriginalReply0
View More
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)