Dan Primack

It’s been nearly a week since SEC chair Mary Shapiro issued her statement about a federal ban on PE/VC firms using placement agents to raise fund capital from public pensions. What remains elusive, however, is the actual proposal. As such, the private equity market still doesn't have answers to such questions as: (a) Would public universities be included? (b) Would firms be grandfathered in if they began fundraising before the rules were put in place? (c) Would all public pensions be required to standardize reporting of intermediaries? (d) Would there be a capital floor, or is it “one size fits all?” (e) Is the SEC out of its frickin’ mind? An agency spokesman yesterday told me that there is no specific timetable for when the rules will be released, but told me to keep my eyes on this section of the SEC website. In other words, the proposal could be there within the next hour, or within the next month. Probably closer

New AOL chief executive Tim Armstrong just finished speaking here at the Fortune Brainstorm Tech conference, and gave a bit more color on the reinvigorated "AOL Ventures" initiative. Sounds like AOL Ventures will basically be a bifurcated program. On the one hand, it will be used like a traditional corporate VC arm, investing in companies that AOL believes could be of eventual strategic value. Or, as Armstrong puts it: "AOL Ventures is not as much a strategy as a membrane around the company to bring in innovation." Of greater interest, AOL Ventures also will be where the company puts past strategic acquisitions that have not yet worked out. Kind of a way station of sorts, with companies given a P&L and then left to chase their

Newly-minted VC Marc Andreeesen is currently being interviewed on stage by Fortune's Adam Lashinsky, as part of Fortune's Brainstorm: Tech conference. Live-blog after the jump...

Is Mary Shapiro jealous of all the pub that Andrew Cuomo has been getting? The SEC today proposed new rules that would prohibit private equity funds (broadly speaking) from using placement agents, when trying to secure capital from public pension systems. This is basically the federalization of what's been doing in New York, and is equally misguided (albeit well-intentioned). This is basically the federalization of what’s been going on in New York, and is equally misguided (albeit well-intentioned). “Placement agents” didn’t cause the pay-for-play scandal in New York. Corrupt public pension officials did. All the scummy fixers in the world can’t make a dent in an honest retirement system. That’s why it’s pay-for-play, rather than just pay.

Venerable venture capital firm Matrix Partners is in the midst of raising two new funds, according to regulatory filings. The larger pool of capital would be for Matrix Partners IX, which is targeting the same $450 million that was raised for Matrix Partners VIII back in 2006 (technically $445m, but you get the point). Typical VC fund, and an LP source tells me that the final close is all but a formality at this point. The other fund is a bit more mysterious. It's called Matrix Partners Special Opportunities Fund, and is targeting $150 million.

Stop me if you've heard this one before: Venture capital investing increased in the second-quarter of 2009, even though investment activity was still much lower than in Q2 2008. Oh yeah, we wrote about it over the weekend (and have been What's different this time is that the data comes from MoneyTree, a joint venture of the National Venture Capital Association, PwC and Thomson Reuters. That last one just happens to publish peHUB, which means we trust these numbers a bit more, have access to the actual database and are able to display a gluttonous smorgasborg of charts (see below). The topline number is $3.7 billion invested in 612 U.S.-based companies. This compares to $3.19 billion raised by 601 U.S.-based companies in Q1 2009, and $7.55 billion raised by 1,048 U.S.-based companies in Q2 2008. To use a semi-apt sports analogy, VCs took a baby step off the sidelines, but are nowhere near the line of scrimmage (particularly given that barely over $300 million has been invested thus far in Q3). In terms of industy sectors, IT managed to (barely) keep its unbeaten streak alive against life sciences ($1.72b vs. $1.53b). This is different than what the earlier data from Dow Jones showed, and MoneyTree does show biotech as its fattest cash cow in a more segmented analysis.

U.S. venture capital investment rose by 32% in the second quarter, according to data released Friday by Dow Jones VentureSource. This comes after a particularly dreadful Q1 (lowest volume since 1998), and puts the industry back at 2005 activity levels. The top-line Q2 numbers are $5.27 billion invested through 595 deals. Of greater import, however, is that healthcare investing topped IT investing for the first time on record. VCs invested $2.23 billion into healthcare companies last quarter, compared to just $1.88 billion in IT companies. The healthcare figures include the quarter's largest deal, a $146 million Series A round for Clovis Oncology Inc.

We've received a bit more info on last month's shutdown of Verified Identity Pass, operator of the "Clear" system that allowed members to pass quickly through airport security. The company said on June 22 that had been "unable to negotiate an agreement with its senior creditor to continue operations." peHUB has now learned that the senior creditor was Morgan Stanley, with Verified Identity owing approximately $33 million. A loose confederation of investors is kicking the company's tires a bit, and considering whether to make an offer. But there are two big impediments to a potential deal. First, Verified Identity founder and ex-CEO Steven Brill has sued the company over what he refers to as a salary dispute (the records are sealed). Second, there is a requirement that Verified Identity must erase its user database by

I often hear that the best VCs are those who once sat on the other side of the table -- investors who "get it" because they were once "in it." On the other hand, that argument is usually coming from VC firms who just hired one of those ex-operators, or from an entrepreneur who just took funding from one. So a simple question: Do ex-operators make the best venture capitalists? To get an answer, I pulled out the latest edition of Forbes' Midas List, which is supposed to rank the most successful venture capitalists. We can certainly quibble about Forbes' inclusion methodology and individual results (the older skew, for example), but hopefully can agree that the overall list is a good sample of quality investors. Next to each of the 100 Midas Listers, I put one of three classifications that best described the individual's career prior to venture capital. They were: "C" for C-level executive, "O" for lower-tier operators and "X" for those without, or virtually without, formal operating experience (ex-bankers, consultants, career VCs, etc.).

Insight Venture Partners is one of the VC world's darlings right now, having taken two portfolio companies public in the past month. But peHUB has learned that a partner on one of those investments, George McCulloch, has left the firm to hang his own shingle. Joining him are fellow Insight managing director Ben Levin and senior associate Sarah Haas. The new firm is called Level Equity, and is based in New York City. No word yet on firm strategy, although both McCulloch and Levin have historically focused on the IT sector. Prior to joining Insight in 2002, MCulloch worked on growth equity deals for Summit Partners in software, semiconductor and communications companies, while Levin concentrated on data networking deals for Greenwich Technology Partners. "They are good, talented guys who saw an opportunity to scratch their entrepreneurial itch," says Jeff Horing, a co-founder