It’s easy to say that Twitter and Facebook came along at the right time, but at that exact same time there were many similar companies (arguably with great products, teams, etc..) that didn't get noticed. What happened, then?
It’s easy to put a cause-and-effect story together if you start at the end and work backward. And while it would be nice to believe that top VCs know how to pick the winners, the reality is that they don’t. Startups are infinitely complex, with many nuances and unpredictable effects impacting the outcomes. Companies need a great team, a great product, great marketing and funding, but anyone that's been in the startup battlefield knows that's not enough.
Complexity hides cause-and-effect mechanisms and produces many false positives.
It’s easy to be prescriptive when it comes to startups. It's more important not to be.
While I think Bill Gross offers an interesting perspective you don't hear too often, I think the argument would be stronger if the word "timing" was replaced with "luck"