The Work I Do with GPs

work, hands

I’m fortunate enough I get to work with some of the most interesting and stellar GPs out there. It’s never been a business I’m actively trying to grow. Outside of me backing managers myself, every so often I’ll get a friend who refers their friend to me and asks me to help them out with thinking through fundraising. It’s always been opportunistic. And even when I work with folks, it’s not primarily about intros. In fact, in all my working relationships, I never offer intros as part of the agreement. But more so working with them to understand how the GPs can better tell their story and run a more institutional fundraising process. Occasionally, I would get asked to advise when a firm should bring in an investor relations professional. But that last part, a piece for the future. So, all that to say:

  1. I’m not an expert in everything, but I do try to actively learn best practices in the market. If I don’t know something, I will find it out for you and/or put you in touch with the best practitioner on it.
  2. I’m now overcapacity. I don’t have the bandwidth to work with every manager that comes my way. I have other things I want to do and am working on.
  3. My primary job is still to support the GPs I back myself.

So, I’m just going to share below exactly what I do when I work with a GP, so that you don’t have to come find me for help. Because we do effectively the below. This approach has also evolved over time. And this is my current approach, circa September 2025. My job is also to help GPs better understand LPs and where they come from. So, while the saying goes as “If you know one LP, you only know one LP,” my job (and personal fascination) is to define and delineate the nuance. The only things I cannot help with if you’re only reading the below are:

  1. Be your accountability partner. Part of my role with GPs is also making sure GPs stick to their promises. Discipline. It’s easy to plan. Hard to execute.
  2. Debrief on LP conversations and pipeline management.
  3. And figure out your LP-GP fit, or your ideal LP archetype as a function of your fund size, your strategy, your experience level and your story.

This might also be one of the few pieces I write that some pre-reading may help contextualize what I will write below.

Most of the time I work with folks who are mid-raise. Not always, but most of the times. So I’m stepping in where there’s already some infrastructure, but not a lot, usually bootstrapped and duct taped together. Not a bad thing. As long as it works, I don’t touch much during the raise itself. Then we work on things and cleaning up systems post-raise or in-between raises. The best time to strategize and plan for a raise is at least six months in advance. But that’s neither here nor there. So what do I do?

  1. I ask the GP(s) to pitch me the fund. We simulate email exchanges, first meeting, second meeting, and due diligence as if I were the target LP persona. I offer no commentary. I am purely the observer. You can do this with most people who do not know your strategy well. Friendly LPs. Other GPs. But I find it most helpful if you can to do this with people who have a great attention to detail, specifically in the literary sense: lawyers, authors, therapists, podcasters, professors, editors, scriptwriters, showrunners, and so on.
  2. Then, I share all the risks of investing in said manager that I can think of. What are the elephants in the room? What parts of the GP, the GP’s story, the strategy, the track record, and the complexity of the story would make it really hard to pass the investment committee (IC)? What might be moments of hesitation? No matter how big or small. There’s a saying that a friend once told me, “When your spouse complains about you not washing the dishes, it’s not about the dishes.”
  3. Label and categorize each risk as a flaw, limitation, or restriction.
    • Flaws: Traits you need to overcome within 1-2 fundraising cycles (~2-5 years). The faster, the more measurable, the better. You can’t just say you’re going to overcome these flaws. You need to have KPIs against each of these.
    • Limitations: Risks that the world or that particular LP believes is true. Like being a Fund I. Or being a solo GP.
    • Restrictions: What you prevent yourself from doing. Think Batman’s no killing code. In GP land, it’s only investing in a particular demographic or vertical. It’s only investing in the Bay Area. And so on.
  4. Stack rank all of them. Depending on the LP you’re pitching, figure out the minimum viable risk list that LP may be willing to accept. It’s not always obvious.
  5. You should always address limitations as early on in the conversation. My preference is in the email exchange or at the very minimum, in the first two slides of the deck. In other words, “here are the primary reasons you shouldn’t invest in me if you don’t like…” Think of it like the elephant in the room. Make it explicit. Don’t wait for LPs to have private investment committee (IC) conversations without you in the room. Or worse, they implicitly, whether consciously or subconsciously, think of the limitations in their head. Having been in multiple LP conversations and a fly on the wall in IC meetings, sometimes an LP can’t fully describe why they’re passing, just that they are.
  6. Next, figure out for each LP in your existing and future pipeline when are flaws also limitations. When are restrictions also limitations?
    • When a restriction is a limitation, there isn’t an LP-GP fit. So, you need to go find LPs, who don’t see your restrictions as limitations. Another reason you should address elephants in the room as early as possible.
    • When a flaw is a limitation, you need to fire yourself before the LP fires you. You need to say “No” before an LP does. Be respectful of their time, but maintain that relationship for the future. Reaching back out every 1-2 quarters to catch up is something I highly recommend. Any longer, LPs will forget about you. And no, that does not mean, “Can I add you to my monthly/quarterly LP update?” No LP will say no, but almost always will your updates die in their inbox. If you don’t care about your relationship with them, why should they?
    • Are you ready for an institutional fundraise? How much of the institutional data room (use this as a reference if you don’t know what that means) do you have ready? And for each flaw and restriction, do you have something in the data room (even if it’s in the FAQ/DDQ) that helps hedge against it?
  7. All that said, you also need to figure out what your superpower is. And you usually only need just one, but you have to be god-tier in that one superpower. There cannot be a close second. Oftentimes, it’s less obvious than you think it is. With all the hedging of risks above, you also need to give an LP to be your champion. You must spike in something that impresses the LP and despite all your flaws and restrictions, that you’ll still go far. And the more closely your superpower is aligned with at least 2-3 of the five (sourcing, picking, winning, supporting, exiting), the better. And you must make sure that it is made explicit to the LP as early in your conversations as possible.

Photo by รœmit Bulut 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!


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.

Gratitude and Deal Flow

thank you, gratitude

A few months ago, my good friend Sam hosted a happy hour for LPs, which he invited me to. There I caught up with a former fund-of-funds (FoF) manager who has booked some of the most impressive returns I’ve ever heard of for a pure FoF play. For context, more than one fund generated over 15X net distributions to their LPs. The numbers were enough to impress me. But I had to ask: “Across all the funds you were a part of, what is something that you look for that you’re reasonably confident others don’t?”

He said two things, but one stood out. “Gratitude. I look for managers who never forget who put them in business.”

In all honesty, I found that odd. Not because I disagreed. I love folks who recognize and are grateful to the people who got them to where they are today. But because it didn’t occur to me that it should be the top two things one should optimize for when picking managers. Naturally, it kept gnawing at me.

In my own experience, gratitude seems to compound. Grateful individuals thank you often and sometimes when you least expect it, and more often than not, assuming you’ve done real work to help them, they compliment behind your back. The people they talk to end up learning about you. Their teammates learn about you. And you’ve earned multiple occasions to meet their teammates and those close to them. When a GP or founder’s teammates leave and start new things, those people often think to call you first.

Grateful GPs often hire talent who are just as humble, and in turn, as second nature, extend their appreciation often. Those same GPs are more likely to invest in people who have similar traits as well. So, it begins this flywheel.

As an LP, I look for emerging GPs whose network and deal flow compounds over time. That the first moment I meet them is the smallest network they will ever have again. So I expect and underwrite a GP’s ability to compound deal flow over time. So Fund n+1 is better than Fund n, and Fund n+2 is exponentially better than Fund n. Gratitude is one way GPs can increase the surface area for serendipity to stick. For there to be more quality inbound opportunities in the future.

Photo by Jonny Gios 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!


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.

How to Increase Dialogue with your LPs | El Pack w/ Kelli Fontaine | Superclusters

kelli fontaine

Kelli Fontaine from Cendana Capital joins David on El Pack to answer your questions on how to build a venture capital fund. We bring on three GPs at VC funds to ask three different questions.

The Council’s Amber Illig asked what happens when a solo GP is incapacitated or passes away.

Oceans Ventures’ Steven Rosenblatt asked why most LPs follow the decision-making of other LPs.

NeuCo Academy’s Jonathan Ting asked what LPs think about GPs asking for help.

From investing in great fund managers to data to investor relations, Kelli Fontaine is a partner at Cendana Capital, a fund of funds whoโ€™s solely focused on the best pre-seed and seed funds with over 2 billion under management and includes the likes of Forerunner, Founder Collective, Lerer Hippeau, Uncork, Susa Ventures and more. Kelli comes from the world of data, and has been a founder, marketing expert, and an advisor to founders since 2010.

You can find Kelli on her socials here:
X/Twitter: https://x.com/kells_bells
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kellitrent/

And huge thanks to Amber, Steven, and Jonathan for joining us on the show!

Listen to the episode onย Apple Podcastsย andย Spotify. You can alsoย watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[01:26] Kelli’s new data discoveries
[04:32] How did Kelli underwrite a manager with no LinkedIn?
[06:19] Is too much data ever a problem?
[08:18] Vintage year benchmarking
[09:49] Telltale signs on GPs’ social profiles
[10:57] Data Kelli wishes she could collect
[15:59] Enter Amber and her new podcast
[18:08] Amber’s background and The Council
[19:08] How does Amber define top companies?
[24:25] How can a solo GP set the firm up well in case they’re no longer there?
[26:11] Kelli’s number one fear with solo GPs
[28:30] Best practices for generational transfers
[32:28] Solo GPs and their future plans
[36:51] Enter Steven and Oceans
[42:38] Would Kelli ever include AI summaries as part of the get-to-know-someone phase?
[44:18] Why do LPs follow other LP’s decision-making?
[48:43] What are the traits of an LP who is likely to have independent thinking?
[51:16] Why don’t LPs talk directly with founders?
[57:59] Enter Jonathan and NeuCo Academy
[1:00:05] Is Kelli seeing more secondaries firms?
[1:01:56] How often should GPs lean on LPs for help?
[1:07:22] Are most LPs helpful?
[1:12:21] What kinds of questions does Kelli get from her own GPs?
[1:15:39] Kelli’s last piece of advice

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

โ€œIf that fund deployed over a year versus a manager of ours that deployed over four years, theyโ€™re going to look very different. So we do vintage-year benchmarking to see how their MOIC stacks up against how the revenue of companies stack up.โ€ โ€“ Kelli Fontaine

โ€œTeam risk is the biggest risk in venture.โ€ โ€“ Kelli Fontaine

โ€œThe same top ten firms are not the same that they were 15 years ago, and probably Silicon Valley. Generational transfer is very hard.โ€ โ€“ Kelli Fontaine

โ€œIf you make the brand bigger than just you that it comes from DNA, support systems, things that you stand for that have had support to get thereโ€”so once that brand is made, the other team members embody that brand as well. Thatโ€™s the way to do it. Itโ€™s really empowering other team members to own a part in that brand-buildingโ€”outwardly and inwardly in decision-making.โ€ โ€“ Kelli Fontaine


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.

81% of America is Underfunded | Vijen Patel & Grady Buchanan | Superclusters | S5PSE1

vijen patel, grady buchanan

โ€œ19% of our GDP attracts about 55% of capital inflows, aka venture activity, and 81% is underinvested.โ€ โ€“ Vijen Patel

We’re back with one of our crowd favorite formats, where we bring on one LP and one GP, and share why that LP invested in this GP. This time, we have Grady Buchanan, co-founder of NVNG, and Vijen Patel, founding partner of The 81 Collection.

Vijen Patel is an entrepreneur and investor. He founded The 81 Collection, a high growth equity firm in boring industries. Previously, he founded what is now known as Tide Cleaners. He bootstrapped what eventually became the largest dry cleaner in the country (1,200 locations) before selling to Procter & Gamble in 2018. Before Tide Cleaners, he worked in private equity, McKinsey & Company, and Goldman Sachs. He lives in Chicago with his wife and two kids.

You can find Vijen on his socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/vijenpatel/
X / Twitter: https://x.com/itsvijen

Grady Buchanan is an institutional and risk-based asset allocation professional with a passion for bringing venture capital to those who have the interest. He founded NVNG in late 2019 and oversees investment strategies, the firmโ€™s venture fund pipeline, manager sourcing, due diligence, and external events. Before launching NVNG, Grady worked with the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundationโ€™s (WARF) $3B investment portfolio, focused on private equity and venture capital initiatives, including fund diligence, investment strategy, and policy. Grady is based in Milwaukee, WI.

You can find Grady on his socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gradynvng/
X / Twitter: https://x.com/GradyBuchanan

Listen to the episode onย Apple Podcastsย andย Spotify. You can alsoย watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[02:41] The pressure of quitting a PE job for dry cleaning
[05:09] Vijen’s self talk as a founder
[06:50] How to overcome doubt
[09:00] How Vijen learned customer success
[10:35] What did Pressbox become?
[12:41] The dichotomy between society’s needs and what gets funded
[14:19] How did Grady go from selling pancakes to being an LP?
[23:51] Why did Grady think he bombed the LP interview?
[29:15] What is The 81 Collection?
[32:22] How did Vijen meet Grady?
[34:39] How is Vijen fluent in Spanish?
[36:40] How did Grady meet Vijen?
[42:21] How did Grady underwrite 81 Collection?
[44:44] What about Vijen made Grady hesitate?
[48:35] What’s one thing about 81 Collection that could’ve gone wrong?
[50:33] The 3 things that create alpha
[52:42] Why does NVNG have the coolest fund of funds’ names?
[53:47] The legacy Grady plans to leave behind
[56:06] The legacy Vijen plans to leave behind

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

โ€œI wrote down everyoneโ€™s concerns, and I just sat on it. A lot of the founders we like to work with, the ones who we really love are the ones who take it in and listen, write it down, then take some time to synthesize everything and then theyโ€™ll act with conviction. โ€˜Why is this stupid? Tell me why. Letโ€™s go deeper and deeper.โ€™ And oftentimes these reasons are very rational and slowly over time, what if I derisk this by doing that?โ€ โ€“ Vijen Patel

โ€œ19% of our GDP attracts about 55% of capital inflows, aka venture activity, and 81% is underinvested.โ€ โ€“ Vijen Patel

โ€œThereโ€™s this crazy stat we recall often: the 50 richest families on Earth, who often build in this 81, theyโ€™ve held, on average, their business for 44 years.โ€ โ€“ Vijen Patel

โ€œWe invest in only amazing managers; we will not invest in every amazing manager.โ€ โ€“ Grady Buchanan

โ€œAlphaโ€™s three things: information asymmetry, access, and, actually, taxes.โ€ โ€“ Vijen Patel


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.

On GP Commits

backflip, commit

1% GP commits have been a part of investing history for as long as most people can remember. But actually finds its origin as a vestigial part of IRS Revenue Procedures from 1974, more specifically Rev. Proc. 74-17, which stated “the interests of all the general partners, taken together in each material item of partnership income, gain, loss, deduction or credit is equal to at least one percent.โ€

And yes, technically, in 1989, Rev. Proc. 89-12 also created a lower bound of 0.2%. “In no eventโ€ฆ may the general partnersโ€™ aggregate interest at any time in any material item be less than .2 percent.” But all of that was overturned in 2003.

Ever since then, the 1% GP commit has withstood the test of time.

But… I’ve always felt that to be a weird checkbox that LPs have for GPs. I get the element around incentive alignment. But why is incentive alignment a static number? If a college student is just starting a Fund I, still with student loans, and raising a $10M fund, $100K is a meaningful proportion of their net worth. Hell, they may not even have it. At the same time, a successful spinout who used to be a GP at a large established fund who’s received distributions already and raising $100M fund will likely have more than just $1M. And $1M alone is not a meaningful proportion of her/his net worth.

So, I think GP commits should be a function of a GP’s net worth, not the fund size.

I want to know that the GP is betting their career over on this next enterprise. I want to know that the GP is more motivated today than they were ever before. Even if they’ve already hit that career-defining success.

I’m looking for the fire under their belly. Why does this upcoming fund matter so much to them?

Personally, it’s not that I only choose to focus on Fund I’s and II’s. I’m open to the idea of other Roman numeral-ed funds, but I usually get the sense that the economics of commitment are misaligned with the intentions and motivations of the GP themselves.

Photo by Drew Farwell 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!


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.

How Many Exceptions Are Too Many? | El Pack w/ John Felix | Superclusters

john felix

Pattern Ventures’ John Felix joins David on El Pack to answer your questions on how to build a venture capital fund. We bring on three GPs at VC funds to ask three different questions.

Atria Ventures’ Chris Leiter asked about the common mistakes LPs make when underwriting solo GPs.

Garuda Ventures’ Arpan Punyani asked how quickly do most LPs get to conviction. First 10 minutes? First meeting?

Geek Ventures’ Ihar Mahaniok asked how LPs evaluate Fund IIs when the Fund I has no distributions.

John Felix is a General Partner and Head of Research at Pattern Ventures, a specialized fund of funds focused on backing the best small venture managers. Prior to Pattern, John served as the Head of Emerging Managers at Allocate where he was an early employee and helped to launch Allocate’s emerging manager platform. Prior to joining Allocate, John worked at Bowdoin College’s Office of Investments, helping to invest the $2.8 billion endowment across all asset classes, focusing on venture capital. Prior to Bowdoin, John worked at Edgehill Endowment Partners, a $2 billion boutique OCIO. At Edgehill, John was responsible for building out the firm’s venture capital portfolio, sourcing and leading all venture fund commitments. John started his career at Washington University’s Investment Management Company as a member of the small investment team responsible for managing the university’s now $13 billion endowment. John graduated from Washington University in St. Louis with a BSBA in Finance and Entrepreneurship.

You can find John on his socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnfelix12/
Twitter: https://x.com/johnfelix123

And huge thanks to Chris, Arpan, and Ihar for joining us on the show!

Listen to the episode onย Apple Podcastsย andย Spotify. You can alsoย watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[02:20] What’s changed for John since our last recording?
[04:08] What is Pattern Ventures?
[06:22] Why is Pattern’s cutoff for funds they’re interested in at $50M?
[07:32] How does John define noise?
[09:34] Do non-sexy industries require larger seed funds?
[11:36] How does think about overlap in the underlying startup portfolio?
[15:22] Enter Chris and Atria Ventures
[18:03] Should solo GPs scale past themselves?
[24:14] Partnerships have more risk than solo GPs
[26:10] How does John think about spinouts from large VC firms?
[27:53] The psychology of being a partner at a big firm versus your own
[30:38] Enter Arpan and Garuda Ventures
[31:26] Geoguessr
[32:52] Garuda’s podcast, Brick by Brick
[34:52] How quickly do LPs know they intuitively want to invest in a GP?
[38:02] The analogy to what GPs do to founders
[43:50] There are many ways to make money
[44:57] Quantifying intuition as an investor
[49:12] Enter Ihar and Geek Ventures
[49:36] How do LPs evaluate Fund IIs when Fund I has no DPI?
[53:01] How do you know if a GP did what they said they were going to do?
[54:47] What if the key value driver is off-thesis, but everything else is on-thesis?
[56:21] Is signing 1 uncapped SAFE per fund reasonable?
[57:14] What is the allowable percentage of exceptions in a fund?
[1:01:32] Good vs bad exceptions
[1:06:06] Reminders that we are in the good old days
[1:07:31] John’s last piece of advice to new allocators
[1:09:00] David’s favorite moment from John’s last episode

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

โ€œIn life, itโ€™s always easy to justify โ€˜why nowโ€™ is not the right time. I think itโ€™s hard to justify โ€˜why nowโ€™ is the right time to do something.โ€ โ€“ John Felix

โ€œWe love investing in things that are contrarian and non-consensus, but there has to be a path to becoming consensus because something canโ€™t remain non-consensus forever. There has to be a catalyst that the market eventually realizes this or else the companyโ€™s not going to be able to raise venture capital. Itโ€™s not going to be able to sustain it and continue to grow and survive.โ€ โ€“ John Felix

โ€œThe type of spinouts we want to back are the people who are successful in spite of working at the big brand, not because they worked at the big brand.โ€ โ€“ John Felix

โ€œYou need to earn the right to start your new firm to do your own thing. I donโ€™t think enough people realize that.โ€ โ€“ John Felix


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.

Uncompensated Risks in VC | Wendy Li | Superclusters | S5E12

wendy li

โ€œItโ€™s not the probability; itโ€™s the consequence. Itโ€™s not the probability when something goes wrong. Itโ€™s the consequence when it goes wrong.โ€ โ€“ Wendy Li

Wendy Li is the co-founder and Chief Investment Officer at Ivy Invest, a fintech investment platform bringing an endowment-style portfolio to everyday investors.

Before Ivy Invest, Wendy was Managing Director of Investments at the Mother Cabrini Health Foundation, where she built the Investment Office from the ground up and managed a $4 billion portfolio. Prior to Mother Cabrini Health Foundation, Wendy was Director of Investments at UJA-Federation, investing across a broad range of asset classes. Wendy began her career in the Investment Office at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. She has a Bachelor of Arts degree from Columbia University and is a CFA charterholder.

You can find Wendy on her socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/wendy-li-cfa/
X / Twitter: https://x.com/askwendyli

Listen to the episode onย Apple Podcastsย andย Spotify. You can alsoย watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[02:29] Wendy’s family’s history with Columbia University
[07:55] The importance of understanding family history
[11:09] Why Wendy chose to work at The Met
[15:16] How did Wendy know in the interview that Lauren would be her mentor?
[19:18] Specialist vs generalist in 2006
[22:58] Pros and cons of using AI as an LP
[29:02] The 80-20 rule for how an LP thinks
[29:29] The one mistake EVERY SINGLE LP makes
[33:27] What is the Takahashi-Alexander model?
[39:38] Who do you learn from when your LP institution is so small?
[41:22] The wisdom of an open-sourced LP reading list
[45:34] What is headline risk?
[47:09] What does ‘uncompensated risk’ mean?
[50:20] Why now for ‘endowment-in-a-box’
[55:07] Wendy’s proudest dish from her mom’s recipe book
[57:09] Wendy’s last piece of advice

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

โ€œWhere [using AI] is a challenge and can present a challenge to somebodyโ€™s development is in the utilization of these tools where perhaps thereโ€™s not an innate understanding of why the data is important.โ€ โ€“ Wendy Li

โ€œThe pattern of mistakes that I certainly made and I saw the others makeโ€”and I know those listening and are earlier in their investor journeyโ€”will inevitably make-… We all make it. Even knowing this is a trap that we all fall intoโ€ฆ even though they are all going to be aware of this trap, theyโ€™re still going to make the same mistake because we all do it, but we all have to learn this one and develop our own scar tissue on this one. Itโ€™s the exciting investment manager that other really smart LPs are invested with that is a โ€˜hard-to-accessโ€™ manager โ€“ that has a window in which they will take your capital. And thereโ€™s this sense of urgency. Sometimes real, sometimes forced. And thereโ€™s this sense that all these really smart investors are doing this thing. And the added layer on the endowment foundation side is oftentimes that thereโ€™s an investment committee member who is super excited about the investment becauseโ€”and Iโ€™ll use a real quote that someone once said to me, โ€˜It would be a trophy manager to have in the portfolioโ€™โ€”and that is invariably a mistake that we all make in our investment careers. I would say that when I have been regretful of avoidable mistakes, it has had that pattern.โ€ โ€“ Wendy Li

โ€œI deeply subscribe to, โ€˜Thereโ€™s always another train leaving the station.โ€™โ€ โ€“ Wendy Li

โ€œThereโ€™s a great risk in being overconfident. Thereโ€™s a great risk in assuming a normal distribution of events and returns.โ€ โ€“ Wendy Li

โ€œItโ€™s not the probability; itโ€™s the consequence. Itโ€™s not the probability when something goes wrong. Itโ€™s the consequence when it goes wrong.โ€ โ€“ Wendy Li

โ€œIn-the-moment decision-making is always harder than you might remember post-mortem.โ€ โ€“ Wendy Li


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!


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.

The Inside Peek Into How Family Offices Gather | Samira Salman | Superclusters | S5E11

samira salman

โ€œThe revenue and economic models for groups are misaligned with how human nature functions.โ€ โ€“ Samira Salman

Samira Salman is a generational forceโ€”a rare blend of financier, strategist, and connectorโ€”revered for her ability to move capital, catalyze ventures, and cultivate the kinds of high-trust relationships that shape industries and define legacies. With over $5.5 billion in closed transactions spanning multiple asset classes, she is not merely a dealmakerโ€”she is a trusted consigliere to some of the worldโ€™s most sophisticated families, investors, and visionaries.

Samira is the Founder & CEO of Salman Solutions, a bespoke advisory firm, and the visionary behind Collaboration Circle, an invitation-only global ecosystem recognized by Fortune Magazine as the premier โ€œby families, for familiesโ€ platformโ€”curating aligned capital, deal flow, and meaningful connection across generations of wealth. She also serves as Chief Operating Officer of a private single-family office, overseeing a portfolio that blends venture capital, direct investments, and multi-generational governance.

Educated as a mergers and acquisitions tax attorney, Samiraโ€™s early career at Arthur Andersen, Deloitte, KPMG, and Shell Oil laid the foundation for her structural brilliance and financial fluency. She holds an LL.M. in Taxation, a JD, and a BS in International Trade and Financeโ€”with a minor in Economics. Her legal acumen, combined with a deep intuition for human behavior, gives her a unique edge in structuring elegant, effective solutions that drive growth, mitigate risk, and unlock hidden value.

Samiraโ€™s proprietary methodology for business growth and ecosystem development has positioned her as one of the most connected and trusted figures in private finance. Her work spans advisory mandates, capital formation, co-investment syndication, family office strategy, and the orchestration of transformational events for UHNW families and industry trailblazers. She is the rare operator who bridges worldsโ€”money and meaning, structure and soul, intellect and instinct.

Her multicultural upbringing and global exposure across dozens of countries have imbued her with a refined sensibility, cultural fluency, and a fierce commitment to authenticity. Samira doesnโ€™t just build businessesโ€”she builds trust-based systems that endure. Her work is rooted in the principle that Relationships Under Management (RUM) are the new AUMโ€”and she is the embodiment of that thesis.

A passionate advocate for womenโ€™s economic empowerment, arts and culture, and global impact, Samira has served as an Honorary Advisor to the United Nations for Social Impact Projects and the NGO Committee on Sustainable Development. She has held board roles with numerous arts, education, healthcare, and professional institutions including the Houston Ballet, Center for Contemporary Craft, and Fresh Arts.

You can find Samira on her socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samirasalman/
X / Twitter: https://x.com/samira_salman

Listen to the episode onย Apple Podcastsย andย Spotify. You can alsoย watch the episode on YouTube here.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[02:27] How did Samira find herself at TASIS?
[04:17] How did TASIS feel when she first arrived?
[07:27] From tax lawyer to family offices
[09:55] How did Samira decide to quit being a lawyer?
[17:12] Why did Samira want to be a tax lawyer?
[19:44] Journaling
[22:39] The blessing of a lawyer brain
[25:19] The Oprah episode that changed it all
[29:45] How did Salman Solutions start?
[33:28] Samira’s first interaction with family offices
[36:43] Show and tell with Samira’s journals and pens
[41:27] What did Samira mean that most family offices fall short of raising their own capital?
[42:54] What is the common family office hero arc into VC?
[44:05] Family office trends that Samira’s seen
[47:17] The starting point for families interested in VC
[50:13] Advice to a friend who wants to invest in VC
[53:31] Book, podcast and conference recommendations
[55:42] How does one qualify for Collaboration Circle?
[56:21] Content recommendations, continued
[59:57] How Collaboration Circle started
[1:06:59] The 3 pieces of Collaboration Circle
[1:09:49] Community economic models and human nature misalignment
[1:12:43] How to create safe environments
[1:18:02] The Dior bag tradition
[1:21:20] Reminders that we’re in the good old days

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

โ€œThe very first thing everybody has to do is give themselves permission to lean into what they are interested in and what does it for them and what they understand and what they have an affinity for, regardless of what everybody else says you should be doing.โ€ โ€“ Samira Salman

โ€œNever doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.โ€ โ€“ Margaret Mead

โ€œThe revenue and economic models for groups are misaligned with how human nature functions.โ€ โ€“ Samira Salman

โ€œNumbers and volume are not what programs humans to feel safe and to be authentic and to create. In order for us to do our best work and be our most thoughtful, our most creative, we have to be fully dropped down into our bodies and safe in our nervous systems. And some of the environments our industry has curated are literally the exact opposite of that.โ€ โ€“ Samira Salman


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!


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.

#unfiltered #95 Loose Food-For-Thought from LPs

food, buffet

Let me caveat that there is no right answer. The purpose of me sharing the below is not to convince you one way or another. Literally, just food-for-thought. Maybe it’ll inspire new perspectives you may not have considered before.

The below is a collection of thoughts I’ve heard from LPs in the last few weeks. Some may conflict with others listed below.

  1. If anyone uses the word “largest” or “biggest” in their event description, the event is automatically ignored. The pursuit towards quantity maximization leads to the perception of quality minimization.
  2. The sourcing of every select deal in the data room / pitch deck seems to triangulate around:
    • (a) I knew this founder for a long time
    • (b) I used to work with this founder
    • (c) The VC who’s leading this round is someone I used to work with / knew for a long time
    • Yes, there are others. But the majority of featured deals seems to fall in the above 3 buckets. Relationships are king. Even for hot rounds Series A and before, founders seem to be only letting in people they know.
  3. Lots of discussion threads floating around with GPs asking their LP base if they should do a hot, exclusive deal that’s off-thesis (ie valuation and off-sector are the primary reasons). Of those who are doing these off-thesis deals, building a plan on when to sell seems to be a prescient conversation. Doesn’t happen all the time, but more than once.
  4. A surprising number of LPs I meet (mostly US based) know what MCP is + named seed deals. AI is what everyone’s talking about even for non-VC-focused LPs. Or maybe I shouldn’t be surprised ’cause my parents who’s not in tech ask me about AI deals too.
  5. AI sentience is a thought that is hovering around. Also large acqui-hires. LPs have started putting together a bingo card of names of who will be the next VP AI / Chief AI Officer at a Fortune 100 co.
  6. Past DPI doesn’t matter in underwriting EMs. Early DPI also doesn’t matter. VC is a power law business where the majority of returns are generated in years 9-15. Funds are also underwritten to be 15 years. “If you’re investing in VC and want early DPI, you’re in the wrong asset class.”
    Note: Funnily enough, am in some group chats where there are some really heated debates on early DPI and DPI at fund term. No right answer.
  7. Families who invest in EMs invest in outliers. Most decks look the same. Problem/market opportunity. Fund strategy. Track record. A few testimonials. Etc. If you want to stand out, your deck has to look different from every other one. Very different.
    Note: I know many fund of funds, endowments, pensions would prefer the exact audience. All in all, know your audience.
  8. Your job as a GP is to find a needle in a haystack. And if that’s the JD, bring a magnet. What do you do/stand for that attracts great founders to come to you? How are you spending time fishing and farming, instead of hunting?
  9. Don’t underestimate the value families can offer you and your portfolio. LP relationships, potential customers, G1 offering advice on how they built an enduring business, etc.
  10. Organic wisdom is learned through experience. Synthetic wisdom is learned through โ€œtextbooksโ€ โ€” reading, podcasts, books, blogposts, conversations on other peopleโ€™s experience, and theoretical discussions. When shit hits the fan, the one with organic wisdom reacts faster and more acutely. Those who have only gained synthetic wisdom either are slow to react or forget to react properly in stressful situations altogether. Naturally, investors often prefer to invest in people with organic wisdom.

Photo by Samantha Fields on Unsplash


#unfiltered is a series where I share my raw thoughts and unfiltered commentary about anything and everything. Itโ€™s not designed to go down smoothly like the best cup of cappuccino youโ€™ve ever had (although hereโ€˜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.

Should VCs Scale? | El Pack w/ Screendoor | Superclusters

screendoor

The entire Screendoor team joins me on El Pack to answer your questions on how to build a venture capital fund. We bring on three GPs at VC funds to ask three different questions.

Kyber Knight Capital’s Linus Liang asked about why LPs choose to bet on new managers as opposed to investing in more established funds.

NOMO Ventures’ Kate Rohacz asked about what parts of venture do LPs think is most opaque.

Articulate’s Helen Min asked if every emerging manager should scale into a larger firm.

The Screendoor team is a powerhouse of experienced LPs, bringing together institutional investment experience that spans over a decade. Lisa Cawley, Layne Johnson, and Jamie Rhode have each built institutional venture programs within innovative family offices, financial institutions, and pensions. They have invested in venture capital across stages, sectors, and geographies, and in particular are known as a go-to for emerging managers.

Lisa Cawley is the Managing Director of Screendoor. Previously, Lisa worked with a private multi-billion-dollar global investment firm where she was involved in all aspects of managing the firmโ€™s private market portfolio, including sourcing and manager due diligence, asset allocation and forecasting, and creating and implementing the firmโ€™s investment data tools and analytics. Lisa started her career at Ernst & Young, where she served on private equity, venture capital, and public CPG clients. Lisa earned an MBA and an MSF from Loyola University Maryland, and she obtained a BBA in Accounting with a double minor in Information Systems and Spanish from Loyola University Maryland. She is a CFA Charterholder and holds a CPA.

You can find Lisa on her socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/31mml/

Layne Johnson is a Partner at Screendoor. Previously, she led the Venture & Growth Equity manager selection effort at the Teacher Retirement System of Texas (“TRS”). At TRS, Layne was responsible for setting the venture capital strategy, including portfolio construction, new manager sourcing and diligence, and increasing exposure to emerging venture managers. She had previously been at Goldman Sachs, since 2012, in the External Investing Group (“XIG”), based out of the New York and San Francisco offices. At GS, Layne initially worked on the hedge fund manager selection team and then moved over to the private side of the business to focus on technology and venture manager selection and secondaries. She also helped lead the Launch with GS Program, including sourcing, investing in, and building portfolios of diverse managers. Layne holds a BA in History from Yale University and currently serves on the St. Davidโ€™s Foundation Investment Committee.

You can find Layne on her socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/layne-johnson-4b71b571/

Jamie Rhode is a Partner at Screendoor. She previously spent 8 years at Verdis Investment Management, an institutional single family office that manages capital for generations 7 through 10. At Verdis, Jamie focused on venture capital, private equity, and hedge fund investment sourcing and diligence. Using a data-driven approach, she helped revamp the asset allocation strategy and rebuild these portfolios. Specifically, through Verdisโ€™s first institutional venture fund program, Jamie played an integral role in shifting the portfolioโ€™s exposure from multi-stage to emerging managers and early-stage VC. Prior to Verdis, she spent four years at Bloomberg, where she held roles in both equity research and credit analysis. There, she created, managed and leveraged an extensive library of statutory, financial and market data for buy and sell-side clients who use Bloomberg to make investment decisions. A licensed Chartered Financial Analyst, she earned her bachelorโ€™s degree in Finance and Marketing from Drexel Universityโ€™s College of Business Administration.

You can find Jamie on her socials here:
Twitter: https://x.com/lady10x
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jerrcfa/

And huge thank you for Linus, Kate, and Helen for jumping on the show.

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

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[05:58] Enter Linus and Kyber Knight Capital
[10:06] Why take the risk of betting on an emerging manager?
[18:40] The types of pushback Linus got when he was fundraising
[19:47] The incentives of an LP when investing in VC
[21:49] How do GPs ask LPs how they’re compensated?
[24:47] Enter Kate and NOMO Ventures
[28:31] What part of venture is most opaque?
[38:18] The things venture LPs look at beyond the metrics
[43:47] “Bad” advice from LPs
[46:27] Enter Helen
[46:48] Helen’s new podcast, Great Chat
[49:34] What is Articulate?
[52:43] Should emerging funds scale?
[1:00:47] How often do GPs say they want to scale
[1:03:03] Layne’s advice for GPs
[1:03:39] Jamie’s advice for LPs
[1:04:55] Lisa’s advice for LPs and GPs
[1:07:35] David’s favorite moment from Jamie’s episode
[1:09:53] David’s favorite moment from Lisa’s episode

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

โ€œMy original intention was never to target emerging managers. My intention was actually to target funds that were the first institutional check into a startup because I was looking for a way to compound capital at an extremely high rate. And that just led me to backing emerging managers because finding a fund that was willing to invest at the pre-seed/seed consistently over a very long term either meant by the time they had a track record that underwritable with DPI, I couldnโ€™t get in or they were an established manager that was slowly creeping up into bigger and bigger fund size so they were closer to Series A and Series B. What I ended up realizing is to go access that part of the market, I had to do emerging managers.โ€ โ€“ Jamie Rhode

โ€œA lot of what we do in underwriting is backward-looking, but really in VC, you want to be forward-looking. So itโ€™s really important to be taking in those datapoints, but if youโ€™re making a majority of your decision on those backward-looking datapoints, I would argue that youโ€™re probably missing the mark when it comes to emerging managers. You actually want to be asking how do I know this firmโ€“this teamโ€“is still going to have an edge in, inevitably, what would be a new market environment. There are going to be new competitive forces. There are going to be new technologiesโ€“new innovation. New at every level.โ€ โ€“ Lisa Cawley

โ€œIโ€™m a firm believer that if you are waiting to see the proof smack you in the face, youโ€™re actually not participating in the proof. Youโ€™re not getting that performance. Youโ€™re not getting those returns. Youโ€™re sitting and youโ€™re waiting. And by the way, everyone else is doing the same thing, so youโ€™re competing against them. Just because someone can identify thatโ€™s a great brand at that point, it doesnโ€™t mean just because you have capital, you can get access.โ€ โ€“ Lisa Cawley

โ€œDonโ€™t get swayed by capital.โ€ โ€“ Jamie Rhode

โ€œYou canโ€™t be all things to all people.โ€ โ€“ Lisa Cawley

โ€œScaling is not synonymous with increasing fund size. To me, scaling means youโ€™re increasing in sophistication. Youโ€™re increasing in focus. And thatโ€™s really a sign of maturity and fund size is a byproduct of that.โ€ โ€“ Lisa Cawley

โ€œGP-market fit is so crucial and you want to make sure youโ€™re setting yourself up for success by being able to shine in what youโ€™re best at and what your background and experiences set you up for as well.โ€ โ€“ Layne Johnson

โ€œSpeed to fundraise does not always equate to a strong investor.โ€ โ€“ Lisa Cawley


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!


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.