In natural systems (i.e. all real systems), it's better to think of exponential growth as just the first half of a sigmoid curve.

In that case, there's an interesting idea: trying to push things over the tipping point.

It doesn't last forever, but nothing does! Instead there's an exciting idea in place: instead of committing your entire life to trying and getting "one thing" to be as big as possible, you can kickstart many things! As someone who likes a bit of variety in my life, that sounds way more exciting to me.

by splitting your resources across many projects, you run the risk of all of them not reaching a critical threshold for which they experience exponential growth.

I think some people at any given point in time (and some institutions and some governments) do a better job than others at splitting their resources because in part because they have a better framework at recognizing what may reach that critical threshold faster than others based on a given set of conditions (or have lower switching costs when it comes to deciding to not allocate resources to something after a certain point).

You don't split, but sell when successful then start other thing. That's the serial entrepeneur thing.

All bacterial growth hits "stationary phase" at some point before collapsing, and he seems to miss that most empires and companies do the same.

Because the goal of a vulture crapitalist is to sell at the exponential part of the sigmoid curve.

And of course, sell the idea that "the next big idea" is exponential at 30x..... Until you hit the top of the sigmoid.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

FYI all those examples are PE, not VC. Fairly different. Not that VC doesn’t have its own problems, but yeah.

Yes it's a nice article but it doesn't take into account situations where the Law of Diminishing Returns applies.