A16Z, Bill Gurley etc. saying startups are spending too much money, and in inefficient ways, and thus there is a burn-rate bubble.
I'm running with their definition and saying that, if 1) VCs give less money to companies - i.e. their max is spending is capped, 2) the companies are able to exit for more $, this issue is certainly not showing up in the data.
Bubble is perhaps an overused term. It has a specific meaning: an investment feedback loop driven by herd effects coupled with a hidden underlying reality of diminishing returns.
There may be a bit of that, but the thing I hear Andressen and others complaining about is like you say, burn.
In that case it's a case of a liquor store owner complaining about drunkenness. VC money fuels a culture of hyper-deflationary short term "dumping" of free stuff into the market to fuel short term exponential growth. This is basically killing any opportunity for revenue anywhere but the extreme enterprise high end-- where costs are highest, sales cycles are slow, and huge teams with high burn rates are needed to address the market. Rinse and repeat.
I'm not sure that's a bubble... More like a tragedy of the commons.
I'm running with their definition and saying that, if 1) VCs give less money to companies - i.e. their max is spending is capped, 2) the companies are able to exit for more $, this issue is certainly not showing up in the data.