One key thing that I think got missed were angel groups, both angel networks and angel funds. These are very different than individual investors and a potential source of early stage funds.

In particular, the definition of an accredited investor missed that individuals with a $200K/year income (or couples with a $300K/yr joint income) are also accredited. This puts many higher-end professionals as potential angel investors, especially when combining their money into a fund. I would suspect groups with these types of angels would also have a lower average age and thereby a higher risk profile for asset allocations.

It seems like the Boston angel groups have a lot of angels in their 30s and 40s, which make for good early stage angel investors. High net worth and high income individuals in their 50s and 60s are naturally going to be less prone toward riskier early stage angel investments.

I checked out your show a while ago through the GA podcast network, and I wanted to email you because I think your shows are interesting. I’ve had fun listening through them. The episodes keep getting better and better.

I’m always looking around for new shows to listen to because I’m a podcaster too. I do a weekly music review show called Have You Heard (http://www.haveyouheard.net). We interview musicians, talk about music news, and review two new records every week. You should check it out. I’d love some feedback on the show.

Support GA podcasters!

-Adam Trimble