MYSTERY OF IN-Q-TEL OR JUST VENTURE CAPITAL?
Had this NY Post article (sign-in required now) about In-Q-Tel in the queue for a day, but came across alarm:clock's viewpoint which I agree with and they put it in a more amusing way than what I was going to write:
The New York Post's Chris Byron has been in a lather the past two weeks about the VC firm In-Q-Tel, which is funded by the CIA. From the a:c's perspective, we get the feeling that Byron doesn't understand how venture capital operates. The gotcha's that he purports to expose seem to be standard VC operating principles. Bryon insinuates that there is something off-base about the CIA investing in a VC firm. He must not realize that many of the biggest investors in VC firms are government pensions and not-for-profit educational foundations who often get great returns from their VC investments. Byron also thinks there is something unseemly about In-Q-Tel calling on members of congress to pitch their portfolio companies. Hmmm? Doesn't everyone try to get Congress to spend money on their projects? (full post)