That sort of covers my depth of analysis here. I am not an expert on how to make the VC ecosystem better, but about three months ago I had lunch with someone who is and we talked about the Ontario government’s approach.

Jonas’ points and Mark McQueen’s post both do a good job at covering the shortcomings of this plan. I.e., reinvesting in the same players and not zeroing in on domestic seed/venture funding.

I do not think that there is a shortage of entrepeneurial talent and energy. As some have pointed out, government regulation/programs/tax breaks are actually pretty good in Ontario. And while it is nice to see the Ontario government stepping in to address the VC crisis in this province, few authentic capitalists would argue that it is government’s job to be a venture captial market maker. Just get out of the way.

And if you are going prime the pump with some cash, try to stimulate some competition and establish high value links to global VC markets instead of reinforcing the tightly bound social network that can sometimes stifle innovation (as I recently wrote about in the MESH, unMESH post over at http://www.socialcapitalvalueadd.com).

Here’s what I remember from that lunch. The nachos were good. Israel seemed to have come up with the model worth emulating and Peru has emulated it with some success.

In those cases, the government basically provided enough funds to convince top tier US venture firms to open a local office (with the Americans contributing some matching funds). Typically a VC partner with a winning record opened the office. The startups received the value add of that experience, the experience of successful partners in the US and most importantly, a bridge into the US market for follow on rounds and marketing.

These foreign VC offices also eventually spun off talented VC partners into stand alone local firms and encouraged globally successful nationals to repatriate.

The effect was the development of a layer of global class venture capital partners and returns on investment that obliged institutional investors to open the flow of cash to the asset class. Ah-ha!

It is tough to message this kind strategy politically though. Who is going to lobby for and sing the praises for this kind of approach?

Cash starved entrepeneurs who are too busy trying to get their idea off the ground? The TD Bank who just got a juicey management contract as a reward for basically sitting on the venture capital sidelines for years? The local VC firms who are the only game in town? Hmm … maybe this is a job for David Crow??

ONTARIO GOVERNMENT FUNDS U.S. VC FIRM TO COMPETE LOCALLY … not a very catch Globe & Mail headline if you are the Premier but probably the best job creation strategy possible.

(wow … that is my first “comment grows into post” experience … catch it all again fresh and new at http://www.socialcapitalvalueadd.com)

“Ugly returns. Dead funds. Funds reinventing themselves…. http://tinyurl.com/5zlcxs ”

How about giving the money directly to Angel investors, those who have built companies, those that are putting their own money in, those with feet on the street experience.

If Ontario is interested in investing in the future, invest in those that have built Ontario, the Angels.