Latest news with #VC
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Deans not in favour of internal JNU entrance, VC tells protesting students
New Delhi: Amid an ongoing hunger strike by Jawaharlal Nehru University Students' Union (JNUSU) demanding the reinstatement of the JNU entrance examination (JNUEE), vice-chancellor Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit has written to the protesting students, stating that none of the university's deans was in favour of conducting the in-house test. In the email sent on June 27 and released by the administration on Saturday, Pandit said she had asked all deans a year ago to take responsibility for conducting JNUEE, but no one committed in writing. "None of the deans gave any commitment in writing and many deans opted for NET and CUET," she wrote, adding, "As a very democratic head of the institute, I have to abide by the decision taken by the deans and the chairpersons. " The VC was responding to an open letter written by the Left-backed JNUSU office-bearers on June 26—the day the students launched the indefinite hunger strike on the campus, protesting the administration's alleged unresponsiveness to several long-standing demands. They accused the administration of going back on its promise made during a 17-day hunger strike last Aug, when, they claimed, the VC had assured that JNUEE would be restored for PhD admissions from the 2025-26 session. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Livguard Lithium-X: The Future of Power Backup Livguard Buy Now Undo You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi Pandit denied the charge of apathy and said she had met all four union members earlier. She insisted that any future meeting would also require all four members to be present (referring to ABVP-affiliated JNUSU member). "JNUSU is a panel of four members and anyone left out makes it undemocratic," she said. The VC also defended CUET as a more inclusive mode of admission. "The director of admissions discussed this with facts, figures and data. He proved to you that CUET was more democratic due to its wide reach and making it a more level-playing ground for all students, and the reserved categories have done better." In their response, the three protesting Left-affiliated office-bearers questioned the administration's claim that deans had opposed JNUEE. They said many deans and chairpersons had expressed support, and that the VC had wrongly shifted the responsibility of organising the exam onto them. The union has demanded a comprehensive meeting with all relevant university officials, including representatives from JNU Teachers' Association. They argue that the VC's insistence on full attendance by all four union members was unreasonable as one of them—who supports the current CUET/NET-based system—has not participated in the ongoing campaign or referendum in favour of JNUEE. The hunger strike, which began on June 26, entered its third day on Saturday, with three central union office-bearers continuing their sit-in at Sabarmati T-point.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Ruckus at Kerala University event: Raj Bhavan seeks report from VC
T'puram: Raj Bhavan has sought a report from Kerala University vice-chancellor (VC) Mohanan Kunnummal regarding attempts to disrupt an event attended by governor at the university senate hall on Wednesday. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Following this, the VC issued a show-cause notice to university registrar Anil Kumar seeking an explanation from the official who allegedly filed a complaint against the organisers of the controversial event without the knowledge and consent of the VC. SFI and KSU workers protested against the organizers of the event at the senate hall which marked the anniversary of the Emergency where a portrait of Bharat Mata was used. Following this, the university registrar asked the organizers to cancel the programme after they refused to remove the portrait as demanded by the registrar. It was argued that the portrait was a religious symbol, and no religious symbol can be used in the hall owned by the university. The VC asked the registrar to explain in detail the circumstances that led to lodging a police complaint against the organizers without his knowledge. It is alleged that the registrar filed the complaint on the instructions of the university syndicate. The registrar, who reached the senate hall, told the organisers of the programme to remove the Bharat Mata portrait or else cancel the programme. However, the Padmanabha Seva Samithi office bearers refused the demands and went ahead with the programme. The VC has also asked the registrar to present the copy of the cancellation order issued by the registrar.
Bloomberg
2 days ago
- Automotive
- Bloomberg
China Investors Ready Capital to Hunt Next DeepSeek
By Welcome to Tech In Depth, our daily newsletter about the business of tech from Bloomberg's journalists around the world. Today, Annabelle Droulers recounts her interviews with China-focused VC managers and what they're looking for in the latter half of this year. Xiaomi takes on Tesla: Xiaomi is launching a $35,000 sport utility vehicle, the YU7, to compete with Tesla's popular Model Y. The company's shares jumped on Friday after a strong number of early orders.
Forbes
5 days ago
- Business
- Forbes
ChatGPT Crushed The First-Mover Myth For Entrepreneurs
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. (Photo by Jason Redmond / AFP) (Photo by JASON REDMOND/AFP via Getty Images) ... More Want to build a unicorn? Stop trying to be first. OpenAI's ChatGPT proves that smart beats first – again. For decades, Silicon Valley, VC, and innovation evangelists have preached the gospel of 'first-mover advantage' – urging entrepreneurs to innovate, launch fast, and raise capital to grab market share before anyone else. Business journalists and even academics echoed the message: Why Smart Beats First – Again and Again! But the truth is different – and ChatGPT's explosive rise is just the latest example. There is a long line of smart movers who beat first movers, including OpenAI didn't win by being first. It won by moving smart – and dominating. The First Mover Myth The First Mover myth has had a long history in venture development – both among academics and in the popular press ( And this mantra persists, despite a long list of smart movers who outperformed the so-called first movers Furthermore, if academic research is needed, a study from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston showed that only about 11% of first movers dominated ( 89% did not – and in fact, nearly half failed. ChatGPT's breakout success proves the point again: first mover doesn't guarantee success or dominance. Success is not about the idea – it is about the strategy (product, customer segment, competitive strategic group, and sales driver) and skills. OpenAI wasn't the first to launch an AI chatbot. Yet by improving on existing technology and strategically launching its entry, it leapfrogged early movers and redefined the category. If you're chasing venture growth, this case offers a powerful lesson: smart movers win – not necessarily first movers. The History of AI To evaluate ChatGPT's meteoric rise, we need to understand the history of AI. IBM and companies like Dragon were launching commercial AI products as far back as the early '80s. In the intervening years, several giant companies had serious investments and businesses involving AI. They included Google, Amazon, IBM, Microsoft, and Meta. In fact, one could argue that nearly every major IT company was involved in AI. The Emergence of OpenAI Out of this emerging-industry fog, out comes ChatGPT from an emerging company called OpenAI that was started in 2015 and introduced its GPT products starting in 2022. OpenAI is anything but a first mover. Yet its product, ChatGPT, has one of the most explosive growth records in venture history – growing to annual recurring revenue of $10 billion as of June 2025. The 5 Lessons from OpenAI's Smart-Mover Rise Given that ChatGPT (or OpenAI) was not the first mover and has not given the press an easy tag to explain its success, here are 5 lessons that entrepreneurs can take from this fantastic success – without the simplistic, and erroneous, 'first-mover' tag. Lesson #1. Unicorn success is rarely just the product. Think holistically. It is a combination of factors, including product, segment, strategic group, sales driver, and customer acceptance. ChatGPT was simple, useful, and perfectly timed for mass adoption. Lesson #2. Find potentially large markets. Most companies have to focus on the right market segment that can help them dominate. Sam Walton used this formula and focused on rural communities (LINK) and so did Mark Zuckerberg, who focused on universities (LINK). ChatGPT's product was so good that it has dominated many markets. This is similar to the success of unicorn-entrepreneurs like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs II (when he returned to Apple), Jeff Bezos, and Travis Kalanick (Uber). Lesson #3. Find the right strategic partnership. OpenAI formed a key partnership with Microsoft that invested about $13 billion and gave it massive credibility, in addition to capital. Lesson #4. Use the freemium model if you have Silicon Valley VC. The freemium model has been especially useful in Silicon Valley and with capital-intensive strategies. OpenAI checked both boxes. Lesson #5. Success favors smart movers. Get smart. The ventures dominating an emerging industry are usually early and smart movers who picked the right combination of product, segment, strategic group, and sales driver. By picking the right combination, OpenAI checked all the boxes of a smart mover. And won. MY TAKE: Being first doesn't win. Being dominant does. ChatGPT, like many billion-dollar ventures, shows that smart execution, timing, and strategy matter far more than the order of the launch. Instead of racing to market, focus on building the right product for the right market with the right competitive edge for long-term dominance, and the right sales driver to take off with less. And do it before the industry takes off. That's how nearly all unicorn-founders took off and dominated.
Wamda
7 days ago
- Business
- Wamda
Why should MENA family offices rethink direct startup investments
For many family offices, the answer is to go direct. Direct investments—bypassing funds and investing straight into startups—have long held a certain allure. The idea of owning a bigger slice of a promising company, skipping management fees, and maintaining control is deeply appealing. But beneath the surface, this strategy often conceals more risk than reward. "After an inheritance or liquidity event, families often make larger investments than their risk tolerance allows," says Christopher Aw, a board director at Operation Snow Leopard and an advisor to multiple family offices. "I've seen wealth vanish from poorly executed direct deals. It's easy to think you can afford the risk because you have a lot of capital, but it adds up quickly." While some family offices succeed with direct investing, many more misjudge the time, expertise, and diligence required to make it work. Christopher adds, "Some family offices now think VC is a bad investment, but in reality, it's one of the best asset classes for high returns—they just didn't approach it the right way." The illusion of control Direct deals offer the illusion of proximity and influence. But unlike institutional VCs, most family offices don't have the operating muscle, domain expertise, or network to properly evaluate early-stage startups. Due diligence often relies on intuition or informal connections, rather than structured frameworks. "Some families think they know the space well enough and don't bring in outside experts, which can be risky," Christophers says. "Deep tech is cutting-edge by definition, so even financial professionals struggle to truly understand it." This overconfidence, especially post-liquidity, can be dangerous. Many families, flush with capital, jump into unfamiliar sectors with limited support. Worse, they tend to over-concentrate—placing big bets on a few deals instead of building diversified exposure. The case for indirect investing So what's the alternative? For family offices, the most practical approach is indirect investing through venture capital funds, or what Christopher calls building a "large passive portfolio". These funds are managed by seasoned professionals who know how to manage risk, structure portfolios, and gain access to high-potential deals. "The best strategy is for family offices to build a large passive portfolio," says Christopher. "Direct deals might seem like passive investments, but they're not—they require a lot of active involvement. Few people do it well." In the MENA region, over 83% of family offices now invest in private equity, with many increasing allocations to VC in recent years. In MENA, approximately 58% of family offices are active in venture capital and other regional studies. The region is home to over 124 single-family offices, collectively investing more than $383 billion across 7,200+ deals. This doesn't mean family offices should avoid direct investing entirely. But the approach must be strategic. Investing selectively, alongside a trusted VC partner or as a co-investor, allows families to benefit from expert insight while retaining a degree of ownership and control. Learning the hard way In the Middle East, where family-run businesses form the backbone of the private sector, the temptation to invest directly is particularly strong. Relationship-driven business culture reinforces the instinct to back people you know. However, as several families have painfully discovered, familiarity does not ensure success. "I know families that lost millions on direct deals that sounded great at dinner parties," Christopher says. "It's not just about capital—it's about discipline, structure, and humility." For fund managers seeking LPs in the region, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity. Many families are sceptical of traditional funding structures, scarred by past mistakes. But others are starting to see the value of partnering with experienced managers, especially in complex sectors like fintech, AI, and cross-border logistics. Some of the most notable investments led by MENA-based family offices include Mayhoola's acquisition of Valentino for €700 million in 2012 (and its partial sale to Kering for €1.87 billion in 2023) and Al Nowais Investments' $1 billion commitment to renewable energy in Egypt. These landmark deals illustrate both the scale and ambition of regional capital. And while the excitement around private credit is starting to cool, it still holds appeal—especially for family offices seeking steady returns in the 10–12% range. Private credit offers a more flexible option compared to private equity, which may yield 15–17% but comes with greater illiquidity. This shift reflects a broader trend: as family offices expand and evolve, more individuals are branding themselves as family office representatives. It's a signal of the growing influence these entities have in shaping capital markets. "At the end of the day, the families who win are the ones who ask hard questions, surround themselves with experts, and stay honest about what they don't know," says Christopher.
