Last week there was an event at Nedspace where "A group of Oregon investors and entrepreneurs, upset at the pace of
public investment in startup companies, plans a rally today to launch a
grass-roots effort to shake $100 million loose from the Oregon
Investment Fund."
according to an article on Oregonlive.com entitled:
Oregon-based firms press for more state investment support
http://tinyurl.com/cfyaeq
I sent some questions to the reporter, Mike Rogoway because I just don't understand some of the statements in the article (not because of the reporting, but more likely I don't understand the investing process of the fund that the article is about):
The statement below seems to directly contradict what the article says is being done with that money:
The state treasurer's office says those funds are already committed, and it can't use retirement funds for economic development efforts anyway.
What she means, maybe, is that the State itself can't, but in reality that is exactly what Credit Suisse is being asked, by the state, to do, right? Making that statement somewhat disingenuous?
Are all the funds committed? Further down it says:
$5.5 million directly into three Oregon companies..
What's the difference between investing in companies and in economic development efforts?
Its sounds like, also, that only 5.5 million, out of 150 million total, has been actually committed....or, as above, the whole 150 million has been committed, to Credit Suisse, to invest in Oregon companies.
Is that possible? Sounds crazy that there might be 145 million dollars sitting around these days.
Who could I talk to to learn more about that fund? Does Credit Suisse have a local spokesperson I could talk to?
The article states that the money was to be invested with VC firms...which, I believe, generally only invest pretty large sums of money into "home run" companies, that can become market-beaters., and provide outsize returns (eventually)...in other words, the big ticket gamble..which I would propose at this point in Oregon's economy is a terrible idea, or at a minimum a very short sighted one.
Not to mention the fact that the money (seems like) is still, pretty much, just sitting there 5 years later. Is an appropriate response...."What the hell???"
After 5 years, Credit Suisse found a total of 3 worthy Oregon companies they felt comfortable with giving 5 million dollars? Out of 150 million?
If the state legislature authorized that system, can they re-think/re-tweak it to make it actually useful? In what way is it currently useful? Earning interest? (Not that passive income is all bad). The article also says rapid investment won't generate the "long-term return the Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund requires". But...I don't know....5 years is pretty cautious. Seems to me "not" investing will guarantee "no" return. Is that OK with the Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund?
Maybe Credit Suisse should not be the arbiter here. Maybe there should be a mandate to DO SOMETHING WITH THE MONEY. And if Credit Suisse can't suisse it out, maybe someone else can.
What is missing from this equation? Could a timely and coordinated effort to dislodge/invest that money accomplish a lot of things...including helping Oregon's reputation as an innovative partner for entrepreneurs? Because right now, of course, Oregon has no such reputation despite the energy of the entreprenurial community here in Portland.
Readers, please fell free to correct my erroneous assumptions above. I may just be tilting at a windmill, but there are gale winds blowing, and the windmill has been sitting unused up on that hill for 5 years...are we tired of looking at it yet, wondering why it's there?