Do you have any concrete evidence to support the claim, that they (a16z) have failed to pulled out and are in a significant loss on their crypto investments?
Otherwise this is yet another baseless and unfounded assumption which can be simply dismissed entirely.
My point is that since they're drinking their own kool-aid, they're not securing the bag / leaving the poker table right now, a time I believe is close to peak crypto bubble (although the bubble could also plausibly last another 5 years and inflate another 5x). They're Leeroy Jenkinsing another $3.5B right now [1] which I think they're at high risk of losing and tanking the IRR of the combined funds.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28664995
[1] https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/01/20/andreessen-horo...
The web3 bullshit that they are spreading as mentioned in your article is evidence that they are pumping their own bags and continuing to hype the web3 narrative with their nonsense. But it isn't evidence that they are 'not securing the bag' and just only sitting there in the bubble, nor does it show that they are at a significant loss. They aren't that silly enough to just sit around, hold and not secure the bag in their investments.
They (a16z) made it so that in their own crypto investments, they can't lose unless in rare circumstances, even in the event of a hack.
They will keep doing it until stricter regulations prevent them from doing so. Such as working extremely closely with multiple exchanges to simultaneously list the tokens they've invested in and use them to dump on retail as exit liquidity. [0][1]
Even if they do get caught, they can pay the SEC a small fine which is nothing more than a slap on the wrist to them from their gains. They (a16z) make money and the SEC makes money.
That is why they still win and rarely lose. But retail in almost every case always loses.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31012587
[1] https://www.benzinga.com/markets/cryptocurrency/21/07/221261...