peHUB Second Opinion 10.13

Exaggerate Much? WSJ opines that VC firms are being “allowed to live,” because Barney Frank has excluded them from proposed registration requirements (although he punted the actual definition of “VC firms” to the SEC). Yes registration would have been a burden, but it wasn’t a threat to kill off the asset class.

Man bites Wharton: A court rules on just how much the Philly biz school is worth on a resume.

He’s like Miley: Silicon Valley angel/entrepreneur Jon Fisher samples Twitter. Decides it’s a waste of time. Quits.

Dodging buses: How much of a blog’s value is tied up in its founder?

Best is yet to come? Do Conde Nast’s closures mark a bottom for magazines?

Back to bonuses: Felix Salmon considers Andrew Ross Sorkin’s “damned if they do, damned if they don’t” piece this morning on Goldman Sachs, and concludes the solution is for Goldman to pay its employees less money. Specifically, put a cap on bonuses. But methinks he’s wrong. The real solution is to tie bonuses much more closely to quantifiable — and reasonable — metrics, thus making success super, failure punitive and risk-taking more considered. As someone who has worked with both very specific/large and very vague/small bonus structures, I can tell you that the former works far better for everyone.

We have a winner: BusinessWeek, now brought to you by the fine folks at Bloomberg.

Therapeutic investing: Why companies developing cancer treatments are particularly attractive right now.

Practice safe beer pong: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute warns that the popular drinking game may help spread swine flu.

This is only momentary: I’m filling in for Erin this afternoon, because she did today’s First Read while I was flying to Dallas (for tomorrow’s peHUB Shindig and Thursday’s Buyouts Texas). We’ll revert to our regularly-scheduled authorship tomorrow.