Yeah -- but what are the chances SpaceX would exist if Musk hadn't personally invested the first $100m?

And Tesla might have been cheaper at first, but Musk led the A round and participated in every funding until the F round (!).

Without a deep pocketed founder willing to absorb years of losses, what are the chances Tesla ever makes it to market? Even so they nearly died before they shipped the roadster.

Yes, that's my point; the VCs didn't really enable these companies, Musk did.

My mistake. I thought your point was, "Tesla was much cheaper to start than people think, well within normal parameters for early venture rounds."

If Musk put down his money, isn't he a VC by definition?

He funded his own idea. The definition of "VC funding" isn't a concrete thing. What's important is the distinction between the way companies like Tesla and SpaceX came to where they are today when compared with companies like Instagram and Facebook.

Do you have detailed knowledge of Tesla and SpaceX's funding history? It was my impression that these companies would never have happened if the initial investors didn't provide ~$100 million of capital themselves.

So it isn't fair to say that SV's venture capitalists were lining up to fund these types of companies, and it remains to be seen whether they will do so in the future.