![]() However, since 2010, CVCs have grown exponentially. This used to be accomplished through R&D and M&A. The rationale behind CVC is fairly straightforward: big companies want to keep an eye on smaller companies and trends that could be disruptive, invest where synergies exist, and gain a competitive edge over competitors. ![]() CVC rationaleĬorporate Venture Capital (CVC) has grown exponentially over the past decade. Corporate Venture Capital and Law Firms A. Like the other models I’m describing, I will highlight both pros and cons. In sum, this essay reflects many of our learnings from that experience, my experience investing in LegalMation back in 2019 (without a formal syndicate), as well as opportunities that our team has been working on in 2022. See Abramowitz, “ As Promised, Our Second #Legaltech Investment Announcement This Week,” Zach of Legal Disruption, (describing collaborative syndicate approach and why worked well for TermScout). In the second half of this essay, I’ll suggest an alternative model, a collaborative industry-wide approach which I have dubbed “Investing like Killer Whales.” This is the strategy we used when we syndicated an investment in AI-based contract benchmarking startup TermScout. I will start by giving a brief introduction to CVC and then I will outline the current models of law firm venture investments, highlighting both strengths and shortcomings. In this essay, I’m going to attempt to answer each of these questions. Why aren’t more law firms investing in startups and/or launching corporate venture arms? Is corporate venture capital (CVC) a good fit for the legal industry? If not, is there a better model? And then, finally, what does all of this have to do with killer whales? Is this the right approach to the legal tech vertical? ![]() Unlike sharks, killer whales hunt collaboratively. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |