Agronomics Share Price (ANIC)

Https://www.greenqueen.com.hk/california-cultured-uc-davis-cell-cultured-lab-grown-chocolate-biomade-nsf-grants/

I agree that ANIC's stakes in the most promising portfolio companies are probably going to get diluted more than the "losers", but not for the reason you give that "ANIC managements violates very basic principles of the VC industry." At this stage, I don't think ANIC management has much choice in the matter. They don't have any more cash to invest, so the choices are:

- sell one or more of the porfolio. Presumably we don't want to sell the best companies, so who is going to buy the least promising, and at what price? Pennies on the dollar. Not a good option.

- issue shares at the market price, well below the NAV. Not a good option.

- issue shares at the NAV, in exchange for more equity in portfolio companies

The third option is clearly the best, and that is what they are doing. When it comes to raising new equity, the best of our portfolio companies have options. Clearly they prefer to get cash, that other investors have and we don't, rather than ANIC shares priced at the NAV that they can only convert on restrictive terms well below the price at which those shares are issued.

So is it Jim Mellon's fault that these companies have the option of raising new capital at better terms with other VCs? The choice isn't Mellon's or anyone else's managing the fund. That's a very different picture than the one you paint of ANIC management selling their winners and keeping their losers.

JM is the most active investor in the market. He has co founded at least 2 of these companies and has a board seat on 6.

To assume he has to be invited to invest would be severely underestimate his standing in this community.

Meatable was different, the CEO had removed their identity in the space and im sure that JM was not interested in their journey anymore. Of course they did not own the IP but that was the case with the initial investment.

Nothing is black or white, there is a lot of substance in what you're saying but this is not a traditional VC space. These are small startups that produce food products, that everybody on the planet will use, time/money can make every company succeed

@Kuentai: Picking Meatable as example, considering that the root cause for the fail are various, is representative for choosing to ignore.

In he VC world, doubling down on winners while selling the portfolio losers, is the name of the game.

ANIC is not doing this.

If it continuous that ANIC either is not asked for or not leading the funding rounds of the winners, the likelihood of the Portfolio turning into a stranded assets.

Supermeat might or might not have an edge. However, this is beyond the point, looking at the bigger picture and ANIC decision patterns that emerged the past 12 month.

ANIC managements violates very basic principles of the VC industry.

JM said that Meatable did not own the IP. I would suggest there is limited value without solid defendable IP