By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher

SVW reader Penguin points to VC Rick Segal's recent post about the quandary venture capital is in.

To summarize: Web 2.0 companies don't need much capital and GOOG, YHOO and MSFT can step in and buy them just for the heck of it for a few million and the VCs don't get a look in. Plus there is not much distinction between the Web 2.0 startups.

Welcome to the world of the new rules startups; no VCs required, although an Angel or two helps... It's a knowledge capital world these days and GOOG and pals offer the largest platform for rolling out Web 2.0 services/products. How can VCs compete against that?

But also, there is widespread animosity towards VCs today. I've been covering Silicon Valley since 1984 and I haven't come across as much hostility towards VCs from startups, as I have over the past 18 months.

Why? Because of the many outrageous VC practices during the dotcom boom and afterwards. VCs always get their pound of flesh and then some.

But what goes around comes around. We live in a serial entrepreneur community here in Silicon Valley, and memories are still very fresh.

The strategy for startups these days is to bootstrap--go for Angels if you need money. And if you do need to pitch the Sandhill row, first raise your valuation as much as possible through your own efforts and financing.

I have a lot of respect for many VCs. Those are usually the ones I come into contact with, because they are out and about and pitching their investments.

There are hundreds of VCs that I never come across and seem to be baffled about what to invest in; they follow each other with a herd mentality and thus mess up the markets for all; and with almost no IPO market exit strategies rely on selling out to one of a small number of large companies--which keeps valuations in check.

When I recently met with VC M.R. Rangaswami of Sandhill.com, he said there were still too many VCs, and that the industry must come to terms with the fact that future returns on investments will be far lower than at traditional levels.

That means VCs have to tell investors in their funds to expect smaller gains. That's a tough sell, especially since the risk has not decreased. I could argue that the risk of failure for VC-backed startups has increased. . .(more on that in future posts).

While some VCs are twiddling their thumbs thinking about what to fund, they would do well to hire a PR agency to spruce up their image. Something along the lines of a benevolent "uncle" looking out for the best interests of their young charges might be an appropriate image to shoot for :-)

- - -

Please also see SVW: That giant sucking sound...will massive tech companies vacuum up all the cool/hot tech companies?