For example: Amazon was a rising star during the late-90s tech bubble, and it's still around today. And it's very much a player in the tech space. How many of us use AWS?
Google has a solid business platform and has definitely made it by all measures.
Netflix is another example. Good product, has upset the industry, sky's the limit type stuff.
Could all of these golden companies fail? Absolutely. For example, look at Microsoft right now - they are still innovating in some spaces, but really struggling in others. Will they go the way of IBM? (Hey, I hope so, but let's not start dreaming now).
Then there's Facebook and Twitter - arguably the stars of the current tech bubble. Are they worth what people say they are? Really depends on what happens over the next few years. Both are definitely becoming platforms that people do all kinds of interesting things on. But at the same time, people could get tired of social networking. (That's my personal bias shining through).
So...it's a bubble for some and not for others.
It's hard to predict the future. A bunch of companies that people have thought could never be worth their outlandish valuations turned out to be. And vice versa.
It's not about anyone being right or wrong. The future is inherently uncertain. Investing is about making a bet that will pay off on average. As valuations go higher and higher, it becomes more and more likely that people are only going to make money on an above average future. That's a bubble, and the longer it takes for a below average future to come the bigger that bubble will grow.
The very thing that makes everyone comfortable with this bubble (that it's mainly "private" capital) is the scariest part. Last time, you could mostly tell when grandma's retirement fund was betting the bank on social networks for dogs. This time, it's all on the down-low.
In general it seems like VCs are throwing 10s of millions around fairly recklessly. 10 million is a lot for most of us, but it's nothing in terms of the US economy. If/when it starts turning into billions instead of millions we could see trouble
meh?
(Figures mentioned above are from the original article).
We'll see.
Edit: What I mean here is that we seem to like to read about "the new tech bubble". It still is largely a speculation, no matter what arguments are presented. The present time may, just may be a golden period for tech innovation, rather than a bubble.
Really. Who is investing in startups right now? Rich people who think they can make more money investing in startups than they can investing in other investment vehicles.
What happens if these rich people lose their money? Nothing. No bail outs. No massive loss of income for "normal" citizens. Rich people get a little less rich. Some rich people who put all their money into angel investing lose all their money.
Who is getting funded? Teams of two and three engineers who have built a product and have gotten some form of traction. Last published figures I've read said that Angel List has gotten 300 startups funded this past year. How much money are these startups getting? Anywhere from $50k to $1M.
300 startups * $1M = $300M in funding in angel capital this past year. The National Venture Capital Association's numbers [1] states that Total VC in 2010 was $23B, which is still 1/5th of the VC that was spent in 1999, and is in line with VC investment over the past 10 years.
$300M in angel funding is roughly 1.3% of the average VC funding per year over the past 10 years.
What _is_ different this time around, is that there are hundreds of smaller bets being placed, rather than dozens of huge bets.
Are all of these hundreds of startups going to have decent exits? No. Are a number of them going to turn into successful businesses, perhaps.
But, what is going to happen is that hundreds of founders are getting an amazing education on raising capital, starting a company, shipping product, and trying to make money. What really excited me is what Silicon Valley and the tech landscape is going to look like in 10 years. What this surge in angel investment is doing is educating massive numbers of engineers in how to build and ship product.
As far as I'm concerned that's a huge win for everyone, regardless of how many exits there are this time around.
Is this a Bubble, really, who cares? Writers that need to sell magazines.
ref:
[1] http://www.nvca.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=ar...
In terms of actual analysis, they're falling into the trap all other journalists seem to be by just repeating the bubble rumors that are floating around. You'd think Economist could come up with more substance for their argument.
The problem is the web industry considers investment to be revenue... in which case you're never in a bubble because profit doesn't really matter. Success in the web industry is simply getting someone to throw money at you.
With that said, it seems that it would be difficult to call this activity a "bubble". "Bubble" in the popular nomenclature are typically used to refer to developments that can have widespread consequences when they "pop" (Re: the housing bubble, the credit derivative swap bubble, etc, etc).
There has been a lot of private investment activity in the tech world recently, but I think that it would be fear mongering to refer to this activity as a bubble. The Internet in general (and the web specifically) is still a relatively recent development. It makes sense that you will see a lot of investment activity in this area.
This same type of thing tends to happen whenever a major technological advancement spurns rapid innovation (Re: the gilded age). It is merely capitalism at work - not necessarily a bubble.