6 Months, $90,000 and (Maybe) a Great Idea
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
There are many reasons that most responsible VC's would not do this. #1 being that if they are pitched effectively, they have somebody right there with the knowledge, passion and initiative to get going on the company. Additionally, it could be detrimental to the VC's reputation to be seen as taking ideas from pitches.
At the same time, I've heard from a few VC's that they are constantly hearing VERY similar pitches for the same ideas again and again. The chance that you are bringing something completely unique is small. This is often why VC's will talk about investing in the people, rather than the idea. Along with the fact that start-ups will often completely change their product before it sees the light of day.
WRT to the article:
Most E.I.R.’s receive a monthly stipend of up to $15,000 to sit and think for about six months.
That is a horrible way to create successful products. Good entrepreneurs take action as much as they deeply ponder ideas.
I know a lawyer who was probably the most driven person I'd ever known, until she graduated law school. Hasn't taken an upwardly-mobile action since she got the job 16 years ago.
I was going to say that my efforts are uncorrelated to my wallet, but I don't think that's true; I think they're inversely correlated.
I hate to cite a second anecdote as rebuttal, but I don't have any controlled studies available :-)
Would I take the money as an EIR? Sure. Building something of real value is tough work and every possible advantage must be considered.
Would I take the best deal? Yup. There's no obligation for a firm to invest in an EIRs idea, so take the color of money that leaves you with the most ownership.