Ouch! "[Don't] take things too seriously in angel investing, I guess that's my motto." That doesn't sound good given the present situation of people looking for change. You sound like you are not going to follow through with the needed changes.

If you need to crack some jokes, joke about the ones that have lead investors astray, but don't joke about losing money. A lack of seriousness has created the current situation that everyone is complaining about.

We've seen both Angels and VCs be very serious about font size, layout, number of slides, and the fast pitch. They haven't shown how those things have lead to the big winners like Google that have staying power even when a bubble bursts and during this recession. Yet they are dead serious about these things and now some of them are dead as investors and money managers.

Now that you've said you've been won over to make smaller investments with smaller potential returns, but with less risk, it sounds like Scott Shane's definition of an Angel investor has won out.

Less than two months ago in past shows you and your friends were very adamant about coming up with a different definition from what Scott uses. You coined the term "Professional Angel" and insisted that Professional Angels have better stats. Then with the crash, we started hearing everyone admit how bad they have been doing.

It would have been great to hear what exactly was it that impressed, renewed, and invigorated you as an Angel investor at the northwest regional angel summit. Do you have something concrete to point to, or was it just a pep rally, or church sermon?

When discussing entrepreneurs versus inventors, it would have been great if you brought up your previous post regarding the question and article; are serial entrepreneurs better?

In contradiction to this show, the article you drew our attention to stated that serial entrepreneurs are not better. We also see another contradiction in TCA's portfolio in the form of Dr. Saad.

Dr. Saad was the founding CEO of Buzz which was said to be the ultimate referral system on the web. It went broke and he repackaged the same product as Clupedia which also went broke. That really shows belief in the entrepreneur over the inventor when the entrepreneur gets funded to try again with the same failed product.

Doesn't TCA understand what it is doing to its reputation? First they give a product with no market the award of Best Investment Opportunity. Then after it fails, TCA invests in the same product under a different name with a different delivery process to the same customer. Then TCA sends out press releases advertising that it has made the same mistake twice.

The questions above about the different topics brought up in your show illustrate a problem that you can see in a lot of your shows; the lack of details. You assume you audience knows what you are talking about.

In discussing subscriptions, you mentioned "this wonderful tool" attracting content. That has nothing to do with measuring the value of your content. I recommend two things for you.

The advertising model looks good because all the biggest players rely on it. Not just Google but national and international news sources as well.

One thing the big players have in common is the general nature of their content and the general nature of their advertisers. Cars for example have a wide demographic.

Your show has a very specific topic and demographic, that is also geographically specific. For example your demographic's need for legal services is specific to their geography; they are likely to want to hire a lawyer near them. Therefore your value to advertisers does not equal the total reach of your show's audience.

The model of paying to listen to your archives is a good one. It generally works for those who charge a fee for access to the entire or a large part of the archive. I recommend you identify those shows that are the most helpful. You might even learn from your past shows and create new ones specific to the education needs of your audience.

You have received a number of comments from listeners regarding the educational benefit of your shows. But the education is haphazard. A little bit here and a little bit there. Paying for each show individually, and some with little benefit, could work to lower sells.

I recommend you increase the quality of your content and create a longer show with variety. Take a page out of the book of news shows, newspapers, and magazines. There is a variety of content in a single issue. Yes, I realize that this leads to publishing less frequently.

To satisfy the needs of your listeners, don't just casually talk about what areas people think are hot with nothing substantiating the comments. Talk about the specifics of a market and a technology in dollars and cents. Explain what the actual numbers, in dollars and cents, for an individual opportunity would be in the so called hot area.

We mostly hear so called up and coming ventures that have been funded. Interview some successes, even if they are not from TCA. Ask about their sales figures, and those of their competition during their rise. Now that they have gone through it, what would they look for in a deal to invest in, or what would they look for in choosing to create an opportunity for investors? What would there investment process be compared to the process of others.

The variety of your show could be in three parts; current investors, past successes and or failures, and new opportunities.

Be very detailed in each section and don't just have general unproven comments. For example, when interviewing a new opportunity, don't just let them pitch. Debate with them, and make them back up their statements.

When talking with investors, you will generally put on a better show if you talk to principles and not money managers. The managers tend to put out spin that does not lead to any concrete advice. Such as now is the time to invest. For a manager, now is always the time to invest in one thing or another, but it never comes with a good explanation on a specific opportunity.

Your largest audience is always likely to be entrepreneurs. Having a variety format allows you to cater to each segment in every show. Getting down to the details instead of just having open ended statements increases the value of your content.

I hope this helps.