The Insightful Investor

As you may have heard, Chinese ecommerce colossus Alibaba is preparing to go public on the US stock market. The company's F-1 filing says its maximum asking price is $1 billion, but most analysts seem to think the actual haul will be around 20 times that -- making Alibaba the largest technology debut ever (current leader Facebook's IPO brought in $16billion). 

Today, the pace of foreign companies filing on US exchanges is the fastest since 2010 -- itself the fastest to date. Already in 2014, we've seen IPOs from Chinese tech companies like Weibo and 500.com as well as a rather disastrous offering from British game maker King Digital Entertainment. Before year's end, we should see at least 14 more: 6 from China, 1 from the United Kingdom, 2 from Spain, and 1 apiece from Norway, Monaco, France, and Greece. 

That's right -- JD.com, Alibaba's counterfeit-glutted competitor, filed for the largest max of all. Rounding out the top five are British financial data provider Markit, Spanish renewables maker Abengoa Yield, and Chinese makeup e-shop Jumei. The sudden rush may have something to do with the market finally reaching its local maximum on tech stocks -- there seems to be a general urge to strike before the metal cools, now that there's decent proof of cooling. 

#Weibo CEO Wang says #China companies planning US IPOs should get it done and not wait as market may cool. $WB #GMIC

— Edmond Lococo 罗孟德 (@EdmondLococo)

May 5, 2014

If you're anything like me, you might be interested in the backers of these pending debutantes. As you can see in the graph below, they run the gamut from blue chip VC firms (Sequoia) to Temasek, Singapore's sovereign wealth fund.

And here they are by cut:

Sequoia tops US venture firms in quantity of investments made in these pending IPOs, with 4. No other US firm on the list appears more than once, and the top single US investor is Yahoo, which stands to net anywhere from $226 million to $4.6 billion. 

Or, notes from McKinsey's presentation on The Mainstreaming of Alternatives: Where do we stand today?

Recently, we've been hearing increasingly wistful reports on retail investors and what they can do for alternative fund and asset managers. Retail investors, long inured to equities and bonds, are now, it seems, cottoning onto the bigger payoffs alternatives can afford [1]. Over the next five years, these individual investors will account for over 80% of new revenue in the alternatives industry.

Since 80% is a p r e t t y significant proportion, I thought I'd dig out the rest of the insights from this report. 

Alors, here they are; make of them what you will: 

The pronouncements:

Investment management is going retail

Alternatives are a big part of the future of retail

The first act of retail alts has been dominated by large traditional asset managers with large flagship funds

The next act will be defined by a "trillion dollar" convergence in investment management, wherein retail will invest in traditional asset managers, hedge funds, fund of funds, and mega alts via intermediaries

The stats:

alts could account for up to 25% total us retail revenues by 2015

retail investors invest the largest amount in hedge funds, followed by real estate and real assets, alternative etfs, and alternative closed end funds.

unrated alt funds attracted $50b of new flows in 2013 from retail and intermediaries

first act of retail alts dominated by large traditional asset managers with large flagship funds: 438 small funds nabbed 6% of flows, while 25 funds nabbed 71% of flows

As for why retail alts is going mainstream, McKinsey offers six reasons: 

disillusionment with traditional investment approaches

increased need for specific investment outcomes that certain alts are uniquely positioned to offer

 evolution in state-of-the-art of retail portfolio construction

 meaningful headroom in large established retail channels

accelerating demand in fast growing channels

additional growth potential with smaller institutions

The usual suspects: Harvard, by a loooong shot, Yale, the UTs, Stanford, Princeton, MIT, Texas A&M, U Michigan, Columbia, and Northwestern. Interestingly, though, Harvard has seen the smallest growth since 2011 (1.9%), while Texas A&M has increased by 24.75% and UT by 19.24%. 

This Massachusetts native is happy to report the bay state leads the nation in college endowment size -- the five MA universities in the top 50 come in at $48.96 billion. Texas ($34 billion), California ($32.58 billion), Connecticut ($20.78 billion -- all from Yale), and New York ($18.34 billion) round out the top five. 

43 of the 50 largest university endowments are located in the United States, and only one non-American university -- the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology -- makes it to the top 10. In the UK, however, universities have begun to cotton on to the endowment-as-operating-budget model, and two of its universities, both public, make it into the top 20 (versus 3 public universities from the US). 

Here's the full top 50 university endowments by country, using data from NACUBO and NonProfitCollegesOnline.com:

Last week, Kevin Roose wrote a (typically) sharp piece for New York Magazine entitled “The Problem with Profitless Startups.” This reader believes a better title is: “The problem with Profitless On-Demand Service Startups,” for that genre, and how it affords its below-market pricing, is Roose’s subject.

For those of you who don’t live in a startup hub or are blissfully unaware that you do, an on-demand service startup lets you order something from your phone and get it delivered by a real person in a set timeframe. Eg a maid service, or a fresh-cooked meal, or a bouquet of flowers.

“But didn’t these sorts of services exist before?” you ask. Yes, but A) you couldn’t order them with a click of a (brightly colored, minimal UI) button on your phone, and more importantly but less obviously B) they weren’t, and aren’t, so dang cheap.

How cheap? Roose, in his piece, spotlights a meal delivery service called SpoonRocket, from which he was able to order a steak au poivre and roasted cauliflower for $8. That $8 included delivery and tip and -- though Roose didn’t mention this -- the cost of a free meal to a child in need, whatever that cost is.

The cheapest way for me to replicate Roose’s meal would be to get 6oz of flank steak from my butcher (well, not my butcher, in that I don’t utilize his services much, but the butcher closest to my apartment) and a head of cauliflower. Maybe that would cost less than $8? If the meat was on sale? But assuming I’m using a delivery service, say, Grubhub, a steak frites in San Fran will run me … $26.50, before delivery and tip.

I was curious if this cost difference bore out for the other startups Roose mentioned, and a handful he hadn’t. Let’s take a look:

 As you can see, 5 of the 7 startups I looked at had prices that were considerably lower than the traditional equivalent.

This isn’t perfect data. Obviously, there are cheaper steaks to be had on Grubhub, but they come in burritos or indian curries etc. And the cheapest bouquet on BloomtThat had different flowers than the cheapest 1-day one on 1800-Flowers. But they were tulips, and looked way nicer, actually, than the mix of carnations and daises 1800-Flowers had to offer.

The big point Roose made was that startups like Spoonrocket can charge $8 for a steak au poivre delivered to my doorstep because Spoonrocket isn’t really paying for it -- its VCs are. And its VCs aren’t really paying for it either -- their institutional investors are. And his question was: given the fact that these startups’ success hinges, at least in part, on their low prices, and given that these low prices require outside funding to subsidize, are they really the sort of investments VC backed by, say, a public teachers’ pension fund, should be backing?

Here are some of the LPs backing the VCs backing the aforementioned delivery startups:

All startups, of course, are risky investments, and perhaps the service apps’ pull isn’t price but convenience and pretty UI, in which case they could perhaps survive if they raised prices to the level profitability demands.

(Raising prices didn’t work out for ole H.W., but like, what startup founder even knows who he is these days?)

Nowadays, the sentiment score for "Italy" + "economy" is pretty negative, but when it comes to family business longevity, no country with entrants in the top 20 comes close. 8 of the 20 oldest family businesses are Italian, with a cumulative age of 5,458 years.

The runners up in count and age are France (3 businesses, 2221 years) and Germany (4 businesses, 2,064 years).

The full list is here:

Italy: 8 businesses, 5458 years

France: 3 businesses, 2221 years

Germany: 4 businesses, 2064 years

Japan: 1 business, 1296 years

United Kingdom: 2 businesses, 896 years

Spain: 1 business, 463 years

From the mid-90s to 2003, William T. O’Hara developed profiles of the world’s oldest family businesses for Family Business magazine. Given that most family businesses fail to last past a single generation, O’Hara, who founded the Family Enterprise Institute at Bryant College, wanted to discern the factors that made these longstays so, er, long staying.

The number one theme these businesses shared? Social networking for pets.

Just kidding! It was that they “satisfy basic human needs such as food, clothing, or shelter.”

Now that more than a decade has passed since the most recent edition came out, I thought it would be interesting to see what had become of the original top twenty.

Do you want the bad news first? Japanese temple maker Kongo Gumi, which was founded in 578, ceded its “World’s Oldest Family Business” mantle in 2006, when it succumbed to lack of people wanting to buy hand-crafted temples.

Here’s the good news: nineteen of the original twenty are still open, and eighteen are not in the middle of being sold (the 19th is the glorious French butterfly-filled estate, Château de Goulaine).

Alors, here’s the full 20, plus one for luck, and life.

1. Kongo Gumi

founded: 578

closed: 2006

country: Japan

industry: temple building

Recent news: The End of a 1400 Year Old Business

O’Hara says: Prince Shotoku brought Kongo family members to Japan from Korea more than 1,400 years ago to build the Buddhist Shitennoji Temple, which still stands. Over the centuries, Kongo Gumi has participated in the construction of many famous buildings, including the 16th-century Osaka castle. Today the family continues to build and repair religious temples and manage general contracting from its Osaka headquarters. Current president is Toshitaka Kongo; his 51-year-old son, Masakazu Kongo, is waiting in the wings.

  2. Hoshi Ryokan

founded: 718

country: Japan

industry: hospitality

O’Hara says: According to legend, the god of Mount Hakusan visited a Buddhist priest, telling him to uncover an underground hot spring in a nearby village. The hot spring was found, and the priest requested that his disciple, a woodcutter’s son named Garyo Saskiri, build and run a spa on the site. His family, known as Hoshi, have run a hotel in Komatsu ever since; the current structure houses 450 people in 100 rooms. Zengoro Hoshi is the current patriarch.

  3. Château de Goulaine

founded: 1000

country: France

industry: wine production, event space, butterfly museum

recent news: Since the announcement that the Chateau de Goulaine would be sold, the Friends of Goulaine Association have rallied to save it.

O’Hara says: The castle, owned by the Goulaine family, houses a rare butterfly collection in addition to a museum. It hosts various functions, including weddings. Wine is available for sale at the castle’s vineyards.

  4. Fonderia Pontificia Marinelli

founded: 1000

country: Italy

industry: bell foundry

recent news: Oldest Italy Bell Maker Avoids Death Knell via Exports

O’Hara says: Bell foundry founded in the small central Italian town of Agnone, high in the Appenine hills. Still uses the original wax techniques of its founders (a wax “false bell” is overlaid with the real thing); its bells toll in New York, Beijing, Jerusalem, South America and Korea, among other locations. Firm has 20 employees, including five members of the founding Marinelli family. Pasquale Marinelli is current managing director. A museum, opened in 1997, features the work of Pasquale’s brother, sculptor Ettore Marinelli.

  5. Barone Ricasoli

founded: 1141

country: Italy

industry: Wine production

recent news: An Iron Chef Judge, An Italian Barone, Celebrities and More at Altitude’s First Birthday Culinary Festival

O’Hara says: The Ricasoli barons were first given their land by the Republic of Florence; today their Brolio Estate covers about 3,600 acres. The family’s main focus is its wine production, although 26 acres of the estate are used for olive cultivation.

  6. Barovier & Toso

founded: 1295

country: Italy

industry: glass making

O’Hara says: The Barovier family produces crystalline glass, mother-of-pearl glass and gold-free cornelian red on Murano Island, about a ten-minute ferry ride from Venice. The Baroviers merged with the Toso family, who were also glassmakers on Murano Island, in 1936.

  7. Hotel Pilgrim Haus

founded: 1304

country: Germany

industry: hospitality

O’Hara says: The Hotel Pilgrim Haus is operated by the Andernach family in the town of Soest, about 110 miles north of Frankfurt.

  8. Richard de Bas

founded: 1326

country: France

industry: paper making

O’Hara says: Richard de Bas has a longstanding reputation for high-quality papers, which has led to many high-profile jobs. The company has supplied paper for limited-edition works by Braque and Picasso. It also operates a museum.

  9. Torrini Firenze

founded: 1369

country: Italy

industry: goldsmith

O’Hara says: Jacopus Torrini moved to Florence from his native village of Scarperia to forge armor for Florentine knights. His workshop later evolved into a goldsmith, creating jewels and other precious objects. Perhaps the family’s most valued possession is its secretive and exclusive “Oro Nativo” manufacturing process, a method of working with gold while retaining its most natural color.

  10. Antinori

founded: 1385

country: Italy

industry: wine production

Recent news: Wine in her veins

O’Hara says: The Antinori family has been in the wine business since Giovanni di Piero Antinori joined the Florentine Guild of Vintners more than 600 years ago. Marchese (or “Count”) Piero Antinori, and his three daughters currently oversee a system of vineyards in Italy, the U.S., Hungary, Malta and Chile that continue to be recognized by consumers and wine critics for their superior-quality Chiantis and other vintages. He sold 49% to British beer brewer Whitbred in 1983, later bought it back. The company has been housed in a Florentine palazzo since 1506.

  11. Camuffo

founded: 1438

country: Italy

industry: ship building

recent news: The construction of modern wooden superyachts

O’Hara says: The business began in Khanià, a Venetian port on the island of Crete. It was founded by a man locals called “Camuffi” but whose real name was El Ham Muftì. The family has supplied boats to Mohammed the Second, the Venetian Republic, Napoleon, the Asburg Imperial and the Royal Italian navies. Experts refer to a Camuffo boat as “the Stradivarius of the sea.”

  12. Baronnie de Coussergues

founded: 1495

country: France

industry: wine production

O’Hara says: When King Charles VIII began selling royal property in France to pay off some of his expenses, Pierre Raymond de Sarret bought the estate known as Coussergues. Today the vineyard produces a wide variety of wines, including Chardonnays, Sauvignon Blancs, Viogniers, Cabernet Francs, Merlots and Cabernet Sauvignons. The Sarret family sells 1.5 million bottles a year and has won numerous gold medals for its wines.

  13. Grazia Deruta

founded: 1500

country: Italy

industry: ceramics

recent news: The 10 Year Anniversary of the Museum of Brick and Terracotta

O’Hara says: The company produces majolica, a special type of ceramic that pre-dates the 13th century. Current CEO Ubaldo Grazia has expanded the company’s business into the U.S. market and has produced three exclusive designs for Henri Bendel. Grazia has also done work for other major department stores and labels, such as Neiman-Marcus and Tiffany.

  14. Beretta

founded: 1526

country: Italy

industry: gun manufacturer

recent news: Beretta Sued Over Elvis-Themed Ad Campaign

O’Hara says: Bartolomeo Beretta’s world-class gun-maker is now a Hollywood favorite; its guns appear in the James Bond series, among other films. Beretta’s reputation for quality craftsmanship enabled the company to wrest a $56 million U.S. armed forces contract away from competitor Colt Industries. Beretta is the weapon of choice of other law-enforcement agencies around the world, such as the Italian Carabinieri, French Gendarmes and Texas Rangers. The company also has earned distinction for its line of hunting weapons. Ugo Gussalli Beretta is the company’s current president.

  15. William Prym GmbH

founded: 1530

country: Germany

industry: First a copper and brass manufacturing business, now a maker of mechanical fashion products

recent news: Prym, YKK and Coats Fasteners Class Action Settlement Of In Re Fasteners Antitrust Litigation

O’Hara says: Goldsmith Wilhelm Prym started a brass and copper manufacturing business in Aachen in 1530. In 1642, the Protestant Prym family lost its guild rights in the Catholic city of Aachen and moved to Stolberg. In the 19th century, Prym developed the first finished products made of brass, iron and steel and later manufactured the first metal haberdashery products to be made mechanically. Michael Prym (born 1943) and Axel Prym (born 1950) are among the current company managers.

  16. John Brooke & Sons

founded: 1541

country: United Kingdom

industry: First woolens, now an office space owner

recent news: Welcome to Inturfurn UK Ltd

O’Hara says: The company, founded by John Brooke, has provided fabrics for British troops (Battle of Trafalgar, World War II), French troops and Russian military personnel. In the 19th century it had 220 looms and 900 employees, down to 280 by 1969. Today it’s headed by Mark Brooke and his brother Massimo Brooke. Mark has changed the company’s focus within the past decade, abandoning manufacturing and instead creating an entrepreneurial development park in the firm’s old mill buildings.

  17. Codorniu

founded: 1551

country: Spain

industry: wine production

recent news: Budget 2014 Live Updates: Trade celebrates the end of duty escalator

O’Hara says: Jaime Codorniu acquired the company in 1551, beginning centuries of family ownership. In 1976 King Juan Carlos I declared the Codorniu estate a national historic and artistic monument. The estate is visited by 200,000 people every year and produces about 60 million bottles of wine annually.

  18. Fonjallaz

founded: 1552

country: Switzerland

industry: wine production

recent news: As rare as gemstones

O’Hara says: Pierre Fonjallaz began the family business when he “devoted himself to the growing of the vine,” as the label on a bottle of Fonjallaz wine will tell you. The company is now headed by Patrick Fonjallaz.

  19. von Poschinger Manufaktur

founded: 1598

country: Germany

industry: originally only glass making, now farming and forestry as well

recent news: Glass meets wood - exhibition of two factories

O’Hara says: The von Poschinger glassworks in Germany began in 1568 when Joachim Poschinger took ownership of a glass factory near Frauenau, near the Czech border. Today the business is divided into three areas—farming, forestry and glass works—though glassmaking is still the focal point of family business affairs.

  20. Berenberg Bank

founded: 1590

country: Germany

industry: Banking

recent news: Barclays to Probably Keep Investment Bank, Berenberg Says

O’Hara says: One of the few remaining independently owned banks in Germany.

  21. R Durtnell & Sons

founded: 1591

country: United Kingdom

industry: construction

recent news: Salisbury Cathedral - £1.0m

O’Hara says: Founder John Durtnell and his brother Brian built their first house in 1593. It still stands and is occupied to this day. The company, based in Kent, is extremely versatile; its projects have included the Royal Military Academy, Chartwell House (Winston Churchill’s home) and Buckingham Palace

Average founder age at investment for this year's Midas List tech investors. 

Two recent posts, one by Harvard Business School Review's Walter Frick, the other by engineer Abe Starway, have attempted to tackle the ageism in Silicon Valley dispute with data. Walter wanted to find the average age of founders whose startups had a $1 billion or more valuation. Abe wanted to find the average age of founders at their first round raised. Both used the year of graduation as a proxy for age. Walter found that the average age at founding was 31, with a median of 30. Abe found that the average age at first round was 33.5, with a median of 2. 

I wanted to find average founder age at investment by VC investor -- do VCs exhibit particular age preferences? I took the twenty VCs from this year's Midas List and the founders of their past three investments. To get the founder ages, I used Abe's data when available (thanks, Abe!), year of graduation as per Linkedin, and good ole fashioned googling when the first two options didn't pan out. Big caveat lector being that the graduation year-based estimate is only that -- an estimate. I did try to use high school or bachelors' graduation years, instead of grad school, as the latter is more varied. 

Had enough methodology? Here's what I found:

The average founder age for Midas investors in aggregate is 35.72, with an average spread of 12.13. The median founder age is 34.53, with a median spread of 10.67. 

The investor with the highest average age is Douglas Leone: 46.3, with a spread of 8. The investor with the lowest average founder age is Ben Horowitz: 29.44 with a spread of 6. Only three investors, Leone, Paul Madera, and Scott Sandell, had average founder ages above forty. Twelve of the twenty investors had average founder ages of 35 or below

As for spreads, Fred Wilson had the highest: 24. Reid Hoffman and Peter Fenton had the lowest: 4. 

And what about the whole ageism thing? I don't have the data to say one way or another. Thinking logically, though, I'd image the best time to start a company would be before you have a family -- preferably before you're even thinking about having a family. 

Since January 1, 2014, five brand new funds have filed Form D's with the SEC that break the billion dollar barrier. 

So who are they?

1. EMSO Ltd, $1.5Bn

The headest of honchos is EMSO Partners' EMSO Ltd fund. EMSO is the London-based hedge fund that Citibank sold off to its managers last fall. According to the March 27th SEC filing, EMSO has raised $1,519,769,617 from 259 investors. The offering is indefinite. 

2. Andreessen Horowitz Fund IV, $1.5Bn

Numbers two and three are both megawatt venture capital firms, one big data-focused, the other more partial to consumer software. Andreessen's fourth fund raised the same amount as its third, but Accel's third fund more than tripled its previous fundraise. 

3. Accel Growth Fund III, $1Bn 

4. Carlyle Realty Partners VII, $1.3Bn

Carlyle's seventh real estate fund has a target of $4 billion. So far, it has raised $1.13 billion, partially from big pension funds including PSERS, Texas County & District, and San Diego City Employees. 

5. FourPoint Holdings, $1.01Bn

Colorado oil tycoon George Solich's newest venture has nabbed $200 million in direct private equity and $800 million in term debt from EIG Global Energy Partners LLC and funds advised by GSO Capital Partners LP, according to the Denver Business Journal. Solich's previous company, Cordillera Energy Partners, was acquired by Apache for $3.1 billion in 2012. 

In terms of top funds by type, Venture Capital brings home the 2.957Bn dollar bacon, followed by Hedge Fund ($1.5), Real Estate ($1.13), and Oil & Gas ($1.01). 

We’re getting reports from a source close to the matter that influential investors are searching for Palo Alto/Redwood City/New York City-based broker-dealer and fund manager Vinay Kumar in conjunction with $60-100 million in missing funds.

Our source reports Mr. Kumar convinced top Bay Area investors to invest with KBR Capital Partners, Mr. Kumar’s most recent private equity firm. According to a August 2, 2013 cache of KBR’s website, Mr. Kumar’s “first two funds and other investments have over 100 million in assets under management” in distressed real estate assets, but we could not find SEC verification of this. KBR’s team page is currently unavailable, and the homepage states the site is under construction. 

Given what we could find on Mr. Kumar, we’re curious as to the reasoning behind the decision to invest with him. 

This past September, FINRA suspended Mr. Kumar’s most recent broker-dealer, KBR Capital Markets, citing failure to meet principal qualification requirements, failure to file quarterly focus reports, and failure to file its annual audit report.

This past August, VII Peaks Capital kicked KBR off the VII Peaks-KBR Co-Opptivist Income BDC, citing financial issues and instability at KBR.

In November, Kevin Weiss filed a suit against KBR Fund, KBR Management, KBR Sag Harbor, and Mr. Kumar himself

According to its 2012 audit report, KBR posted a net loss of $1.2 million for that year. 

Two of Mr. Kumar’s previous ventures, Kuber International Inc and 50 Pine Lane LLC, were also suspended, according to Wysk and CorporateDir.

Already, 2014 has produced a bumper crop of tech IPOs both profitable (Varonis, Rubicon Project, Coupons.com) and depressing (King Digital Entertainment). But the real money's been in acquisitions, with the top three netting 6 investors a $4.5 billion ROI.

Let's take a look at the big three, starting with the biggest:

1) Whatsapp

Exit: $19,000,000,000

Investors:

Sequoia Capital

Amount invested: $60,000,000

Return on investment: 50 fold ($3,000,000,000)

2) Nest

Exit: $3,200,000,000

Investors:

Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers

Amount invested: $20,000,000

Return on investment: 20 fold ($400,000,000)

Shasta Ventures

Amount invested: ~ $13,000,000

Return on investment: ~ 15 fold ($200,000,000)

3) Oculus VR

Exit: $2,000,000,000

Investors:

Matrix Partners

Amount invested: $19,000,000

Return on investment: 20 fold ($380,000,000)

Spark Capital

Amount invested: $19,000,000

Return on investment: 20 fold ($380,000,000)

Andreessen Horowitz

Amount invested: $75,000,000

Since peak venture capital funding in 2006, LPs have been steadily migrating from the asset class or reducing their allocations. 2013 was the slowest year for VC fundraising since 2010, with a total of $16.7 billion raised from 185 funds. However, the exit market has improved over the past two quarters, which may renew VC's appeal.  

Who's biting so far? New York State Teachers' Retirement System leads the pack, with $133mn invested in four funds--FirstMark Capital III, General Catalyst VII, Lightspeed Venture Partners X, and Lightspeed Venture Partners Select Fund I. The Teachers Retirement System of Illinois follows, with $130 million invested in Union Grove Venture Partners and Lightspeed's Venture Partners X and Venture Partners Select. 

2013 was a good -- heck, maybe even a great -- year for venture capital firms and their institutional investors. Which: thank heavens, because the preceding years? Not so great. Not so great to the tune of CalPERS deciding to slash the VC allocation of its PE portfolio from 7% to 1%. Not so great to the tune of the Ewing Maria Kauffman Foundation declaring, in its 20 year VC report that LPs "invest too much capital in underperforming venture capital funds on frequently mis-aligned terms."

But yes, 2013: rosy. And 2014 has been pretty good to some, particularly Sequoia, KPCB, Shasta, Spark Capital, and Matrix Partners, all of whom saw big returns from relatively small investments in Whatsapp, Nest, and Oculus Rift. 

So which firms have seized on the rosiness as a way of attracting public pension LPs?

The top dog of 2014 is Union Grove Venture Partners, which received $100 million from the Teachers Retirement System of the State of Illinois. At its heels is Lightspeed Ventures, which landed $30 million from TRS and $60 million from the New York State Teachers Retirement System. 

Here's the network graph breakdown: