> So net net the chances of success from passive angel investing are only slightly better than playing the lottery.

Is this right? An organization running a lottery—their whole job is to run a lottery, they’ve staked their reputation on the fact that they pay out to winners. The one with a reputation to defend is the one paying out.

The company angel investor is dealing with a company that, ultimately, wants to either get into position to sell some service, or wants to get bought. Their raison d'etre isn’t being a reliable payer-out of winners. I’d expect the lottery to be much more honest.