November, 2025 - Cup of Zhou

November 28, 2025November 27, 2025

Woe is Me

I was talking to an emerging manager raising a $10M fund recently. He shared a comment, likely off-the-cuff, but something I’ve heard many other emerging managers echo. “This year, most of the dollars deployed into venture has concentrated in only a few big funds.”

Not this manager in particular, but I’ve heard so many other Fund I or Fund II GPs say that. Blaming their struggle with fundraising on the world. It’s not me, but the world is conspiring against me. Or frankly, woe is me. But there is no LP who ever wants to hear that. Building a firm is hard. Building a startup, likely harder. No one said it’ll be easy. So let’s not pretend it’ll be all sunshine and rainbows. If you thought so, you’re deeply misinformed. If you’re going to be an entrepreneur of any kind, you need to take matters into your own hands. You cannot change the world (at least not yet). But you can change how you approach it.

And as an LP, that’s the mentality we’re looking for. Or as Raida Daouk once said on the pod, we like “GPs who can run through walls.”

That said, the mega funds who are raising billions of dollars are raising from institutions whose minimum check size is in the tens, if not hundreds of millions. These same institutions would never invest in an emerging manager. Their team, their strategy, and their institution isn’t built for it. When they have to deploy hundreds of millions, if not billions, a year into “venture” with a team of four or less, you’re not their target audience. So as an emerging manager, those mega funds are not your competition at least when it comes to LP capital.

You’re competing against all the other funds (likely emerging managers) at your fund size. Who can take the same check size you can take. That’s who you’re competing with. So whether you like it or not, billions going to the mega funds has, from a fundraising perspective, nothing to do with you.

If you are looking for reasons to fail, you will find one.

As the great Henry Ford once said, “Whether you think you can, or you think you can’t, you’re right.”

Photo by Johannes Plenio on Unsplash

#unfiltered is a series where I share my raw thoughts and unfiltered commentary about anything and everything. It’s not designed to go down smoothly like the best cup of cappuccino you’ve ever had (although here‘s where I found mine), more like the lonely coffee bean still struggling to find its identity (which also may one day find its way into a more thesis-driven blogpost). Who knows? The possibilities are endless.

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

November 24, 2025November 23, 2025

“Venture Should Play More Like Moneyball” | Carson Monson | Superclusters | S6E9

“The limiting downside is actually something a lot of emerging managers don’t think about. If you can turn all of your portfolio companies that don’t hit that exit velocity, if you can find a soft landing for those companies versus that’s a writeoff and they’re dead and done, that’s extra effort, but that’s an extra turn on your fund’s performance.” — Carson Monson

Carson Monson is a seasoned allocator with nearly a decade of experience backing emerging and spinout GPs across large institutions, government entities, and family offices. After stints at Greenspring, SITFO, and building a fund of funds strategy for a large European single family office, he now runs the fund of funds at CrossRange, which focuses on supporting top-tier emerging and spinout GPs.

Carson has backed everything from micro funds to high-profile managers spinning out of tier-one firms. He is deeply committed to being a thought partner and strategic resource to the GPs he supports, helping them navigate the complexities of fund building and long-term success in the VC industry.

You can find Carson on his socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carson-k-monson/
X / Twitter: https://x.com/Monsson_

Listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. You can also watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[02:08] Wildlife and wholesome trouble
[06:03] The journey to being an LP
[10:54] How did Carson join Greenspring?
[13:55] Lessons across Greenspring
[15:46] How many deals did Greenspring do per year?
[18:46] An example of a qualitative metric worth measuring
[20:16] How many off-thesis bets is a VC allowed to make?
[21:25] When do GPs move from thematic bets to opportunistic bets?
[25:45] How much AUM should any one GP have?
[29:46] Why does Carson liked concentrated portfolios?
[30:32] The case for concentrated portfolios
[36:40] Relationships with GPs should stay at the LP partner level
[39:49] Fund strategy at Fund (n) vs Fund (n + 1)
[45:19] What the hell is ‘critical node theory?’
[49:54] Examples of great references
[52:58] The halo effect of mega funds
[58:48] How does Carson get to inbox zero
[1:02:09] Why is CrossRange different?
[1:08:17] The last time Carson had a pinch-me moment
[1:10:17] Carson’s ricotta gnocchi
[1:12:28] Post-credit scene: Ramen, gluten, Tokyo, and Tonkatsu Suzuki Pt 2

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

On if 20% of the fund is focused on opportunistic bets… “Wealthy is a nice word. I would say [20% is] egregious. […] 10%, it’s not like it’s the right number, but it’s the number most LPs won’t contest.” — Carson Monson

“In the past, there have been GPs who are truly excellent at one thing or a couple of things, whether that’s a thesis, strategy, or an approach. And that approach makes a ton of sense at the fund size that they’re operating at or maybe a little bit larger. In the 20-teens especially, people were able to raise more and more, and strategy drift became a huge issue. That is something managers have to face the music on now. It’s almost like the idea of being a professional baseball player and grinding and working your way up and becoming excellent and an all-star baseball player. Then being, ‘Well, the motion is similar in cricket, so I’ll just go play cricket now.’ Ya some of the motions are similar, but it’s a fundamentally different sport. Strategy drift, fund size drift; it can be a really easy trap to fall into. The motions are similar, but you lose that competitive edge when you start to play a different sport.” — Carson Monson

“If you’re more concentrated, there is an ability to impact outcomes more meaningfully. I like GPs that play a critical role in the ecosystem in which they operate in. If you play a critical role—whether that’s in go-to-market motions, whether that’s in commercialization, whether that’s in branding and storytelling—there are so many ways you can play that role. Those types of GPs tend to have an ability to move the needle for their founders more—both on the upside and limiting the downside.” — Carson Monson

“Venture should play more like Moneyball. If you can get your companies on base and limit strikeouts, that is actually so impactful at a fund level. More emerging managers should try to think like CIOs, and less like individual investors, like being a portfolio manager and managing outcomes. Obviously, venture is a game of minority positions. You do not have sole control. Playing that role for your founders, it impacts performance. It impacts reputation and, in fact, your ability to win in the future.” — Carson Monson

“You cannot say, ‘I’m going to be SV Angel today, so I can be USV tomorrow.’” — Carson Monson

“A multi-billion dollar mega fund has to have a portfolio of companies whose aggregate equity value outstrips the GDP of most small nations on this planet.” — Carson Monson

Follow David Zhou for more Superclusters content:
For podcast show notes: https://cupofzhou.com/superclusters
Follow David Zhou’s blog: https://cupofzhou.com
Follow Superclusters on Twitter: https://twitter.com/SuperclustersLP
Follow Superclusters on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@super.clusters
Follow Superclusters on Instagram: https://instagram.com/super.clusters

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

November 21, 2025November 20, 2025

Underwriting Things That Don’t Change

One of the most interesting lines I heard on a podcast that Mike Maples was on was: “90% of our exit profits have come from pivots.” Which I first wrote here. Then here. It’s a line that lives rent free in my mind. Ideas, startups, roadmaps, and goals change all the time. I get it. That’s life. Very, very few folks are folks who unilaterally pursue one thing their entire lives. And of those who do, they’re not all successful.

Another friend of mine whose track record speaks for itself, having invested and involved herself in multiple boards before those companies became unicorns and even after, once told me that the idea she invests in is irrelevant. As long as it has grounds and can be adjacent to a large market. The primary thing she looks for is the founding team.

Early-stage investors obsess about people. They’re not wrong. Some are misled by these “VC-isms.” Others still have their own way of underwriting them. I don’t have a crystal ball. I’m also not the smartest person to be dishing out predictions. I have a rough idea of what will change, though I may not always be right. But I don’t know how they’ll change. Or when. So I’ve lived an investing career obsessing over things that don’t change. Or as Naval Ravikant puts it: “If you lived your life 1000 times, what would be true in 999 of them?”

I’ve written about flaws, limitations and restrictions before. But to quickly surmise:

Flaws are things you can overcome. Limited track record. Never managed a team. Never scaled a product. Limited access to capital.
Limitations are imposed by others and/or the environment. Gravity dictates that objects don’t fall upward. There are only 24 hours in a day. If you’re not based in the Bay Area, it’s harder to raise capital. Certain investors prefer co-founders and partnerships. Certain investors care about warm intros. The list goes on.
Restrictions are rules imposed on yourself by yourself. Batman can’t kill. You only invest in solo founders. You only invest in healthcare. You don’t invest in anyone outside the Ivy League schools. But some restrictions go deeper. You’ll never hire from a job portal again. You never hire or invest outside of your network. You won’t invest or hire having never met someone in person. You need to meet their spouse before you make a hiring decision. You don’t invest in single parents. You don’t hire anyone who doesn’t read at least one book per month. You micromanage. You don’t hire anyone who cannot curse. And yes, I’ve heard all of the above and more. My curiosity is always: Why do you impose such restrictions on yourself? What is the story you’re not telling me? Is out of a fear or admiration?

All that to say:

Flaws will and can change if it is a priority. But won’t change if they’re not.
Limitations might change, but it’s outside of your and my control. And I don’t get paid to pray to the weather gods.
Restrictions often don’t change.

Whether you admit it or not, certain habits are hard to change and unlearn. It’s possible. But that requires you to not only be aware of it, but also actively want to change it. Other habits are second nature. How you treat others. How you start each conversation. Why you look both ways before crossing even an empty street. Why you’ve sold yourself a particular personal narrative. Why you have to invest a certain thesis.

The world seems to always be trying to stay on top of things, but there seems to be far less dialogue around how to get to the bottom of things. To me, when it’s underwriting a person and their team, it’s about underwriting what doesn’t change rather than underwriting what could.

Photo by Hc Digital on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

November 17, 2025November 23, 2025

Can Your Check Size Win You Board-Level Transparency? | Apurva Mehta | Superclusters | S6E8

“A manager doesn’t generally fit into their ultimate quartile until Year 6.”

Apurva Mehta is the co-founding Managing Partner of Summit Peak Investments, a fund-of-funds that boasts a portfolio of both venture fund investments and direct investments, including the likes of Affirm, Anduril, Airtable, Opendoor, and Wish, just to name a few.

Prior to starting Summit Peak in 2018 with his co-founder, Patrick O’Connor, he previously served as Vice President and Deputy Chief Investment Officer for the Children’s Hospital Endowment Portfolio in Fort Worth, Texa. From 2008 to 2011, he was the Director of Portfolio Investments at The Juilliard School in New York City. Apurva began his career in investment consulting and investment banking at Citigroup and Lehman Brothers. He was recognized for his expertise when he was named to aiCIO Magazine’s Top Forty Under Forty in 2012 and 2013 and honored as a Rising Star by Institutional Investor. He holds a BBA in Finance from The George Washington University.

You can find Apurva on his socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/apurvaamehta/

Listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. You can also watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[01:40] Tennis
[02:45] Lehman Brothers’ impact on Apurva
[05:28] What AI is missing in investment management
[14:26] Underestimated qualitative metrics that impact a GP’s story
[22:10] Building Cook Children’s Hospital foundation portfolio from scratch
[30:24] Moving quickly as an LP
[31:32] What does Apurva look for in the first meeting?
[37:20] Ugly sweater Christmas parties
[39:56] Apurva’s favorite ugly sweaters over the years
[41:40] Post-credit scene: What does GFW mean?

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

“A manager doesn’t generally fit into their ultimate quartile until Year 6.” — Cambridge Associates

“If everybody’s running the other way—running from the fire, let’s run into it and there’s an opportunity here.” — Apurva Mehta

“When you think about the brand-name firms, they are iconic firms, iconic names. We love the fact that they’re co-invested alongside us. Even if we could build relationships with those firms, we didn’t feel like we’d get the transparency—maybe it was because of our check size, but maybe that’s just because of how they operate—that we needed to go to an investment committee.” — Apurva Mehta

“The transparency at the brand-name firm level is not as high as it is with the kinds of firms we back.” — Apurva Mehta

“Back then, everything was white space, building around network and ecosystems […] It was easier then because the landscape was less crowded. There were 150 backable or quasi-backable seed funds in 2012. 2000 to 3000 now backable and quasi-backable funds in the market. But it was easier then to figure out what we were looking for because it was just brand new.” — Apurva Mehta

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

November 13, 2025November 12, 2025

120 BPM

I was on a walk with an LP friend recently around Redwood City. And he told me a remark that another LP had about a mutual investor relations friend we had. That our IR friend started the conversation with, “What are your life goals?” And it alarmed that LP who was meeting our IR friend for the first time. To which, this LP told a few others that he was not only thrown off, but also felt offput by the interaction.

It led to a discussion between my LP friend and I where neither of us, knowing this mutual IR friend, would ever think less of our IR friend because that’s just how this person operates. But to someone who has no context of our friend, it would seem bizarre.

One of my friends who, at one point in time, was a full-time professional DJ, once told me, “The golden number is 120. 120 beats per minute. It’s the rhythm that when you strip all the noise away and you can get a heart to beat that fast, it feels like you’re in flow—flow state. Pure ecstacy.

“But you can’t start the set at 120. If your mix is at that pace, and the heart isn’t, it feels discombobulating. You need to work up to it. Start the set at 70. And over the course of a one- to two-hour set, you work your way up to it. And notice the audience. The crowd must be nodding their head to your beat. And if you ever lose that bob, slow the set down again. And try to catch that heart rate again.”

To this day, probably one of the best pieces of advice on how to hold a conversation I’ve gotten to date. And it was never meant to be so.

A question I get surprisingly often is: “Why did you start the podcast?”

Among many reasons — I get to ask dumb questions to smart people, refine my diligence skillset, get better at asking questions, and so on — one of which was that when I only have an hour and change with someone, I’d rather not spend 10-15 minutes on small talk. How are you? How was the weekend? Which seems to be the LLM that’s coded in us on how to start a conversation and hope eventually, you can get to the meat and potatoes of the conversation. And it makes sense.

To use the DJ analogy above, most people’s resting heart rate is around 60-100. To take the middle of the road, 80. And for busy people who are constantly distracted by meetings and tasks that need their attention, a conversation with a stranger is among the lowest of their priorities. So I always believed that people would be near their resting heart rate when chatting with a nobody like myself. As such, they need icebreakers like “How are you?” to warm them up to the conversation, where their first impression of how you answer that question will indicate where the conversation might go.

On the flip side, most people haven’t been on podcasts. Much less, the guests I aim to have on. LPs. Many typically aren’t given the stage. And even if they are, it’s closed door discussions and private events. Rarely, do they get a public stage. So, the hypothesis was that on average, an LP will most likely be more nervous, excited, you name your fair share of anticipatory emotions jumping on a podcast as opposed to an offline 1:1 conversation. Six seasons in, I’d say we’re pretty close to the mark there.

As such, a faster heart rate means I am often given the privilege of starting the conversation not from “How are you?” but a question closer to 100-110 beats per minute, with hopes we can get into the questions that result in 120+ bpm sooner. And it’s almost always easier to ask a question “for the audience” than for yourself.

“Tell us about the time you proposed to your wife via a billboard. And how does that influence the way you think about pitches today?”

“Half your games on chess.com open with the Ruy Lopez. How do you think about opening gambits when you play white. And how much, if at all, does it influence the way you think about opening a conversation with a GP?”

“How does getting your first day in investment banking postponed, which was supposed to be Sept 11, 2001, influence the way you think about serendipity?”

All questions that I would hesitate to say, would be easy opening gambits in a 1:1 coffee chat. But your mileage may vary.

Photo by Tobias Rademacher on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

November 10, 2025November 11, 2025

What does GP-Friendly ACTUALLY Mean? | Caroline Toch Docal | Superclusters | S6E7

“It’s a mathematical reality that the highest performing GPs in this part of the market often also have the highest kill rates, which means some things are incredible and other things are super wonky and you have to be cool with that. You can’t be doing a six across the board.” — Caroline Toch Docal

Caroline Toch Docal backs early stage fund managers as the lead of BCV’s Emerging Manager Program. She believes in investing in funds as early as the first close, which is a rare focus in the LP landscape. She’s a lifelong early stage enthusiast from her time at Venture for America to Techstars to Chief to Dorm Room Fund to now Bain Capital Ventures, where she runs the emerging manager program there which has seen quite the evolution since 2017.

You can find Caroline on her socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carolinetoch/
X / Twitter: https://x.com/carolinetoch

Listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. You can also watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[01:33] BCV Emerge
[02:30] The 13-year summer camp experience
[07:46] From VC to LP
[09:50] Compare/contrast early stage investing to emerging GP investing
[12:51] Behind the scenes of Caroline chose to become an LP
[14:36] Caroline’s first investment
[16:24] What is a GP-friendly diligence process?
[21:27] How Caroline pre-qualifies an investment?
[24:50] Understanding if a GP REALLY believes VC is their life’s work
[26:25] Examples of long-term language
[31:05] The 3 Acts of BCV’s Emerging Manager program
[36:44] What the hell is BGH?
[38:03] Stand up comedy
[39:20] Dogs vs cats

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

“One of the things that’s not really talked about in this part of the asset class is everything looks pretty good until you see a lot of stuff.” — Caroline Toch Docal

“Sometimes people use the referencing phase to get to know people they’d want to meet. I don’t believe that is necessarily the most GP-friendly thing to do.” — Caroline Toch Docal

An example ‘long-term language’: “They don’t celebrate fundraising; they celebrate outcomes.” — Caroline Toch Docal

“The average anchor check for a $10-25M fund today is $4.2M. In 2017 when we started, it was less than $3M. So that’s a huge change. Related, the LP base is just concentrating. Using that same size as a benchmark, they have 25% fewer LPs than in 2020.” — Caroline Toch Docal

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

November 7, 2025November 7, 2025

The Last Job

Ever since I became an LP, albeit small, but a dedicated one, when people ask me what kinds of funds I invest in, I, of course, share the usual:

Funds I and II
Pre-seed and seed managers (ideally first checks)
Both emerging investors (limited track record) and emerging managers (extensive track records, but first-time managers)
Industry-agnostic, but little overlap with my existing portfolio
Geographically-agnostic
Bias towards concentrated portfolios
Bias towards sub $50M funds

These are all boilerplate demographics. And I’m happy to qualify each one, but they’re all traits that, more or less, I seek alongside a lot of other emerging manager-focused institutions share. But one additional thing I share with others is that I look for GPs who believe venture is the last job they’re ever going to have.

The world’s best founders bet their entire lives on the success of an idea. The literal definition of all eggs in one basket. Along that journey they’ll raise capital from a variety of people, some of whom will take board seats and be their trusted partners. The last thing a founder would want is someone who “retires” 3-4 years into the job because they didn’t have the intestinal fortitude to stick with the business. They leave a vacant hole in the board. They leave their founders by the wayside. These founders need someone who has their back no matter what.

And even if not, these GPs are the folks founders can call at 3AM in the morning, and these GPs have jumped out of bed before they’ve even picked up the number. They’re primed even on the weekends. Even on vacation. It’s borderline not healthy, but the GPs love this craft as much as the founders love theirs. To them, this job and the all shit that comes with it is the utopia.

The truth is things can change. Will change. But at the time of our investment, I need to believe that every GP I back has no Plan B, that they’re going to figure it out no matter what. And more importantly, they need to believe that. That they’ve been put on this planet to do so. That they will help their portfolio companies figure it out no matter what. And the more concentrated their portfolio, the more they must help. Incentives align.

It’s hard to describe what that exactly looks like because different people exhibit that differently. It’s also one of those things you can’t just say, but comes out in the small things you do, over time. It’s like glitter. Deep and enduring intentions have a way of sticking with you. They’re hard to shake off. And in their darkest, character-building moments, they shine.

And by function of that, we will too. Giving up should not, cannot exist in their vocabulary. I err towards GPs who run through walls. And if they can’t, they need to believe with every fiber of their body they can and will it into existence. Even if they don’t know the answer, they will figure it out quickly. Naturally, they have an extremely high rate of iteration. Their decks, weekly updates, and even their memos will go through sweeping evolutions over the course of a few short months. And that pace will only get faster.

I like investing in people who want long careers in venture. And that will lead us towards two kinds of people:

The kind of person who wants to get rich on fees
And the person who would do this even if they didn’t get rich because they love this craft.

The first cohort will likely have all right answers. They know the jargon. The modelling. The narratives LPs want to. They know exactly how big their Fund III and IV and V looks. How big, their check size. And everything will be explained as a function of today’s dollars, today’s terms, today’s environment. A few deep references will unveil how they treat others. Why they change jobs. What did they say at the job interview every time.

The latter cohort will have a world view. The way the world will look 30-40 years from now. Not in terms of technology, but people. They don’t try to get on top of things though it’s part of their job. They get to the bottom of things. They’re laser focused during conversation. They’re not looking at the notifications on their phone. They’re looking at the small details of the conversation and their mind turns in ways that you haven’t seen others turn. And they often look at things that don’t change. They can go really deep in areas any rational person will have taken at face value. There’s a natural obsessive quality they have about them.

They notice things others do not. And they have a thoughtful reason to things people take for granted. They show evidence that their shower thoughts revolve around this. They wake up in the middle of the night thinking about this. They consume information from various sources and all roads somehow still lead to Rome. In this case, venture.

Photo by Sven Mieke on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

November 3, 2025November 2, 2025

Where Does Intuition Come From? | Yiwen Li | Superclusters | S6E6

“The intuition part comes from activities of creativity that change your perspective.” — Yiwen Li

Yiwen Li is a seasoned investor with a successful track record of investing in AI, blockchain, and healthcare tech while developing global business partnerships to fast-scale the business.

Yiwen is currently Head of Venture Investments at Bayview Development Group, a global family office with diverse exposure public market, private equity, venture, and real estate. Prior, she was a Principal at Alumni Ventures, responsible for end-to-end multi-stage investments focused on blockchain and fintech. She was Director for Corporate Strategy at Masimo (Nasdaq: MASI). She built an innovation pipeline in healthcare connectivity and data analytics. She was Director for Corporate Development at NantHealth (Nasdaq: NH), where she established the international business division. Yiwen started her career at Capital Group in equity research.

Yiwen is an Advisory Board member of C-Sweet. She served on the board of Give2Asia as the chairman of the finance committee and a member of the investment committee. She was an advisory board member for the Asia Society where she co-founded the “Asian Women Empowered” initiative. She was recognized as the” Top 50 Women Leaders in San Jose 2024 and 2025”, “Top 50 Women in 2019” and the “Most Inspirational Women in Web 3”. Yiwen is also the author of one of the best sellers “Make the World Your Playground”, inspiring women to find their unique path. She is a frequent speaker on innovation and emerging technology trends.

Yiwen holds a Master from the London School of Economics and a Master from the University of Vienna. She also graduated from the Venture Capital program at UC Berkeley and the Private Equity Program at Wharton. She was selected to be one of the ” Young American Leaders” at Harvard Business School. Yiwen is a recipient of the European Union’s Erasmus Mundus scholarship. She is fluent in Mandarin and German, worked and lived in Europe, Asia, and US.

You can find Yiwen on her socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/yiwenli999/

Listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. You can also watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[02:07] Yiwen’s childhood
[05:00] Jazz singing
[06:14] The value of learning languages
[09:01] How to build intuition around emerging managers
[14:51] Getting to the bottom of a GP’s motivation
[16:33] What percent of GPs are not in VC for the right reasons?
[19:47] Does success fuel or inhibit ambition?
[24:17] The cost of knowledge is cheaper
[24:56] Competitive edges in the current world
[27:06] Why creative activities matter
[31:21] Advice to emerging LPs
[32:42] Post-credit scene

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

“The entrepreneur’s [life] is a life where you’re eating glass every day.” — Yiwen Li

“For the first time, the cost of knowledge is becoming cheaper.” — Yiwen Li

“It’s the easiest time to create a company. It’s also the most difficult time to maintain the competitive edge of that company.” — Yiwen Li

“The intuition part comes from activities of creativity that change your perspective.” — Yiwen Li

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: