Posts

Posted on

Telltale Signs of When Risk is High

jenga, risky

At the end of last week, an LP told me something quite provocative. That right now in 2024, we’re in a low-risk environment.

And in all fairness, I thought he was completely bonkers. Fear is high. Investments have slowed their pace, especially in the private markets. Markets have really yet to recover. Some believe we’ve hit the bottom and will bounce around the bottom a few times. Others think we’ve yet to see the worst of it. Hell, just yesterday, Eric Bahn tweeted the below:

Wars are raging across the world. Currency is fluctuating on a global scale. Hell, even for the average person, prices are going up at a rate unfamiliar to most people’s memory.

But his next line really made me pause. “You’re right. There’s geopolitical risk, currency risk, market risk, and valuation/pricing risk. And we can identify every single one of them. In fact, the actual risk of investing today is really low, but the perceived risk is really high. Risk is highest when you can’t tell what the risk is. That was 2020 and 2021, when you couldn’t put a finger on what kinds of risk were out there.”

And that really stuck with me. To underscore again, risk is highest when you can’t tell what the risk is.

And so paved way for this blogpost. Albeit, that last line was the punchline.

He later told me that the concept wasn’t original, but that its origin traces its way back to Ken Moelis. Regardless of the attribution, it’s worth doing a double take on.

There’s that famous Peter Drucker line, “You can’t manage what you don’t measure.” And in many ways, it is just as true for risk as it is for tasks and KPIs and OKRs.

The family office for a well-known luxury brand once told me that they like to pay the complexity premium on esoteric alternatives. To them, venture is one of those esoteric alternatives. In addition, they’re also happy to overpay during bull markets. Access to a volatile and nascent asset class, to them, deserves a premium.

But taking a step back, there may be more wisdom to it than I initially thought. In bear markets, when the risk is real and discrete, there is no complexity premium to pay. After all, you can begin to manage what you do measure. On the flip side, in a bull market, where no one really knows who will win or what the macro risks are, a premium can be and often is paid as a bet on a company’s future and insurance against a margin of error that is hard to define.

Of course, one can say that the premium is often hype-driven instead of risk-driven. But really, hype is just long-term risk donned with a new set of clothes. A short-term luxury with a buy-now-pay-later tag that comes in quarterly installments of belt-tightening and regret.

While I personally have always believed that as an investor it’s better to be disciplined and to “dollar cost average” across vintages vis a vis time diversification, there are several great investors who believe price is a trap. At the top of my head, Peter Fenton and Keith Rabois. The latter shared his thoughts earlier this year on why. At least for seed and Series A. That in summary, there is no limit on how much you pay for a great company at the seed and Series A (likely the pre-seed as well) that won’t return you multiple-fold back. And that debates on price really are leading indicators on conviction or lack thereof.

The last part of which I agree to an extent.

All that to say, I think a useful exercise to go through whenever making a major (investment) decision is to take out a notepad and write down all the risks you can think of. If you can think of it, you can probably find a way to hedge against it. On the flip side, if you’re about to make a decision and you can’t think of any risks, that’s probably the biggest risk you’ll take.

As my mom told me since I was a kid, “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.”

But if you do come up with a good list, and the world around you is still scared, and you think there might be something special in the opportunity in front of you, sometimes it pays to be bullish when others are bearish.

Photo by Naveen Kumar 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.

Posted on

A Jerk’s Guide to Being Kind

dog, bully, fight

First off, my lizard brain that optimizes for immediate gratification thought “A Jerk’s Guide to Being Kind” would be a fun title. Clickbait-y (kinda). Great for SEO. So I used that as my prompt for this public journal entry. 🙂

So, if you didn’t come for a public apology and how I say no, I’ll see you in next week’s blogpost.

Secondly, I was reading Chris Neumann’s blogpost this week, aptly named “The Beginner VC’s Guide to Not Being a Jerk.” And realized, holy frick, I’m a jerk. In it, he describes five things that VCs do that come off as jerkish.

  1. Don’t Use Possessive Adjectives
  2. Don’t Multitask When a Founder is Pitching
  3. Don’t Badmouth Founders
  4. Don’t Mansplain
  5. Don’t Ghost Founders

And of the five above, I know I’m an offender of three of the above. Using possessive adjectives. Multitasking. Ghosting. Probably in that order from most frequent to least frequent. (Sorry, Chris. Sorry to founders I’ve done this to.) The first two I don’t do intentionally, nor do I do the either of them often.

Not sure if it makes too much of a difference, but rather than say “my company” or “our companies,” I do say “our portfolio companies.” Just with one extra word in there. Occasionally, will let it slip when I’m trying to shorten the sentence I’m saying.

I know I’m more prone to multi-task when I’m not the only investor in the room, and definitely when I’m not the primary investor. Again, don’t do it often, but it happens. And I never do so when I’m the only other person in that conversation. 99% of the time I do let the founders and GPs I talk to know that I’m just taking notes of our conversation. Personally don’t use the AI notetakers, but that’s a discussion for another day.

And ghosting. My goal is to get to inbox zero every day. And I really do my best not to ghost. But three things will always happen:

  1. Some email or text always ends up slipping through my inbox. Either it goes in spam, or during certain days, I’m bombarded with hundreds of emails and it slips through the cracks. And I do give every founder and GP who pitch me the right to re-surface past emails if it does slip through.
  2. If the email or message seems like it came out of an automation or mail merge AND I’m not interested, I do let it drop. I read EVERY email for sure. But if that email looks like the same one that you send to every investor, those have been going straight into the archives more and more. That also means that some emails just read like it’s an automated email even if it doesn’t, and it slips through.
  3. There’s a shortlist of people who have abused my old personal policy of responding to every email I get. And so for those people, I’m not sorry if I do ghost you. That said, it’s a pretty short list of people (probably 30-40 people as of now).

And lastly, well, I’ve made founders pitching me cry. Not something to brag about. But in sharing what I thought was honest feedback, I made tears flow.

So, in summary, I’m probably a jerk.

In my mind, a jerk is someone who prioritizes their own beliefs and priorities to the point that they either intentionally ignore or severely de-prioritize others’. Although I try my best not to ignore what other might want or need, but I do often prioritize my own. So to add on to all the above, I’m sharing some situations where my jerkiness comes out and what I say in those moments.

When having tough conversations

I actually learned this while listening to Lenny’s podcast with Matt Mochary. When I need to let someone go. When I need to call a friend out on their bad behavior. Or when my partner and I get into a fight. “Preface hard conversations with: This is going to be a difficult conversation. Are you ready?”

In addition, I also preface with how long I think the discussion will take. “May I have thirty minutes of your undivided attention?” And what the topic will be on. No point in blindsiding the other person.

It helps set the stage. And if the other person needs more time, they have the option to back out. Moreover, all tough conversations are 1:1 conversations. At least for me, even if it relates to many, I start notifying them all on a 1:1 basis.

When trying to leave a conversation at an event

This one also isn’t original. I learnt from a friend of mine who is far more eloquent than I am. Not all conversations at events are created equal. And sometimes, at an event, especially a networking event, my goal is to say hi to the event host or to talk to someone else on the floor. And in between, I may find myself in another serendipitous. Case in point, yesterday, I ended up meeting a founder who sold his last company for $500M exit to a large Fortune 50 company in the parking lot and who was figuring out his next thing. Serendipitous. And super fun, but I was going to be royally late for another event if I stayed chatting in the parking lot.

So, when I need to leave a conversation, instead of excusing myself to go to the bathroom or get more food, I’ve learned to say, “I’d love to ask you one last thing that I’d beat myself up tonight if I didn’t ask before I need to go say hi to XXX.”

One, it timeboxes the next few minutes of the conversation. Two, I’m still interested in the individual and I want them to get the last word before I head out.

For 1:1 conversations

I usually let people know at the very beginning of the conversation that I have a “hard stop” at a specific time. Which 90% of the time is true. Usually another meeting. Or I have just way too much work on my plate that I need to get to.

When turning down a meeting (for now)

I wish I had more time in a day to talk to awesome people. I also wish I had more energy in a day to talk to awesome people. But unfortunately, I only have 24 hours in a day. And well, I’m an introvert. As in, I enjoy writing this blogpost you’re reading right now since 5AM in the morning than telling someone in a live conversation what I will end up writing here.

As such, if I’m interested in meeting at some point, I usually say something to the tune of: “I would love to meet, but if I do so within the next XXX weeks / months, I would have failed in my promise to the people I care about. So if you’ll allow me to be a good friend / family member / supporter of my existing projects and investments, could we revisit this in YYY weeks / months?”

Other times to save everyone’s time, since I won’t find my interest levels gravitating towards said topic, I let people know it just isn’t of interest to me in the foreseeable future, and that their luck may be better elsewhere.

When turning down an investment opportunity

This is actually something that was inspired by one of Jason Calacanis’ podcast episodes. And while there are many things I may not agree with him on, I really like the phrasing he uses to turn down founders who push back against his investment decision. And I’ve added some lines that best fit the way I talk. Which I also included this in my 99 series for investors.

“I always have to accept the possibility that I’m making a mistake. The venture business keeps me humble, but these are the benchmarks that the team and I all believe in.”

In closing

Sometimes I think it’s inevitable to appear as a jerk to some people out there. While one can try to reduce the splash damage, the truth is sometimes what you have to say may not be what the other person wants to hear or see. But as long as you hold yourself to a high degree of integrity and do so in as kind of a way as you can, I think that’s all that really matters.

Often times, I do believe it’s more important to be kind than nice. I hope the above helps.

Photo by David Taffet 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.

Posted on

Qualitative Signals to Look for in Emerging GPs | Jaclyn Freeman Hester | Superclusters | S2E9

Jaclyn Freeman Hester is a Partner at Foundry. She joined in 2016 with a passion for supporting the next generation of entrepreneurs and investors. Jaclyn leads direct investments in early-stage companies, often collaborating with Foundry’s partner funds. She loves working closely with founders to solve hard problems and think about the human elements of business. She invests across B2B and consumer companies that exhibit strong end-user empathy and use technology to empower individuals, unlock potential, and improve experiences.

Jaclyn helped launch Foundry’s partner fund strategy, building the portfolio to nearly 50 managers. Bringing her unique GP + LP perspective, Jaclyn has become a go-to sounding board for emerging VCs.

Jaclyn first fell in love with entrepreneurship while earning her JD/MBA at CU Boulder (Go Buffs!). There, she served as Executive Director of Startup Colorado, where she got to know Foundry and the incredible Boulder/Denver startup community the firm helped catalyze. In her brief stint as a practicing attorney, Jaclyn advised clients in M&A transactions and early-stage financings. She also witnessed the founder journey first-hand, working closely with her husband and his family as they built a B2B SaaS company, FareHarbor (acquired by BKNG).

Jaclyn loves the Boulder lifestyle, but her heart will always be on the East Coast, having grown up a New England “beach kid.” She is the proud mother of three humans and three dogs and is a blue-groomer-on-a-sunny-day skier and 9-hole golfer. In her glimpses of free time, you can find Jaclyn enjoying live music, especially at Red Rocks and in Telluride, two of the most magical places in the world.

You can find Jaclyn on her socials here:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/jfreester
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaclyn-freeman-hester-70621126/

And huge thanks to this episode’s sponsor, Alchemist Accelerator: https://alchemistaccelerator.com/superclusters

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

Brought to you by Alchemist Accelerator.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[03:24] The significance of Kara Nortman in Jaclyn’s life
[13:59] Lesson on recognizing effort from Dan Scheinman, Board Member at Zoom
[18:27] The question to disarm GPs learned from Jonathon Triest at Ludlow Ventures
[23:37] The differences between being a board member and an LPAC member
[32:04] Turnover within institutional LPs
[33:58] The telltale signs of team risk in a partnership
[41:25] How to answer “How do you fire your partner?”
[44:05] Foundry’s portfolio construction
[53:22] What makes Lan Xuezhao at Basis Set so special?
[59:59] What does Shark Tank get right about venture?
[1:03:37] Jaclyn’s Gorilla Glue story
[1:05:51] What keeps Jaclyn humble today?
[1:12:11] What will Jaclyn do after Foundry’s last fund?
[1:16:28] Jaclyn’s closing thought for LPs
[1:18:10] Thank you to Alchemist Accelerator for sponsoring!
[1:20:46] If you enjoyed this episode, a like, a comment, a share will go a long way!

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

“By the time track record is established, it’s almost too late.” – Jaclyn Freeman Hester

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

Posted on

#unfiltered #87 Shower Thoughts on Great Founders and Great Investors

expo, markers, whiteboard

I’ve been doing some thinking as of late in and out of the shower. In conversations. In reexamining my own investment thesis. And changing it as a function of scar tissue and tears of joy. As such, sharing a few shower thoughts below that for the below, might be better described as a tweet than in a long-form blogpost.

About founders

  1. A community or 1000 true fans built without big brands and logos is far more impressive than a community built by leveraging someone else’s brands.
  2. 20 years of experience is more impressive than 20 one-year experiences for deeply technical problems.
  3. 20 one-year experiences is more impressive than 20 years of experience for cultural (consumer) problems.
  4. Great founders don’t delegate understanding. Senior execs aren’t hired until founders themselves prove out the playbook.
  5. In the age of AI, new information is more valuable than remixes of old. Standing out is more important than fitting in. The latter of which will be replaced with by AI given the wealth of data out there. (Ironically, this line is inspired by old conversations plus Sriram Krishnan’s blogpost)
  6. Revenue matters more than traffic for consumer products since AI bots can now mimic simple digital human behavior.
  7. Silicon Valley / SF Bay Area is strong because of the high quality of eavesdropping. There are so many ideas being thrown around in coffee shops. It’s quite easy to stumble across a world-class lesson without paying $2000 for a conference ticket. Things sure have changed since ’08.

About investors

  1. In early stage venture, debates on price is a lagging indicator of conviction, or more so, lack thereof.
    • Price also matters a lot more for big funds than small funds.
    • Price also matters more for Series B+ funds.
    • Will caveat that there’s an ocean of difference between $10M and $25M valuation. But it’s semantics between $10M and $12M valuation. How big your slice of the pie is doesn’t matter if the pie doesn’t grow.
    • Not saying that it’s correlated, but it does remind me of a Kissinger quote: “The reason that university politics is so vicious is because stakes are so small.”
  2. The reasons Fund I’s and II’s outperform are likely:
    • Chips on shoulders mean they hustle more to find the best deals. They have to search where big funds aren’t or come in sooner than big funds do.
    • Small fund size is easier to return than a larger fund size.
    • Rarely do they have ownership targets (nor do they need significant ownership to return the fund). Meaning they’re collaborative and friendly on the cap table, aka with most other investors, especially big lead investors.
    • Price matters less. Big funds really have to play the price game a little bit more since (1) likely to be investing in multiple stages with reserves, and price matters more past the Series A than before, and (2) they’re constrained by check size, ownership targets, and therefore price in order to still have a fund returner.
  3. “Judge me on how good my good ideas are, not how bad my bad ideas are.” — Ben Affleck when writing Good Will Hunting. A lot of being a VC is like that. Hell, a lot of being a founder is like that.
  4. We like to cite the power law a lot. Where 20% of our investments account for 80% of our returns. But if we were to apply that line of thinking two more times. Aka 4% (20 x 20%) of our investments account for 64% of our returns. Then 0.8% account for 51.2% of our returns. If you really think about it, if you invest in 100 companies, we see in a lot of great portfolios where a single investment return more than 50% of the historical returns.

Photo by Mark Rabe 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.

Posted on

An LP’s Guide to the European VC Ecosystem | Ertan Can | Superclusters | S2E8

Ertan Can is the Founder of Multiple Capital, a fund of funds focused on investing in micro VC funds in Europe and has been a limited partner in top funds you’ve heard of including Entrepreneur First and Angular Ventures, just to name a few. He’s done his tour of duty in the asset management world at JP Morgan to covering investor relations topics at Thomson Reuters to investing in startups at a family office. Ertan is also a founding member of 2hearts, a community dedicated to building tomorrow’s tech society with cultural diversity.

He is also a proud MBA graduate from the ESCP Business School and a long time student of finance and law catalyzed by his time at Frankfurt and London.

You can find Ertan on his socials here:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/rtancan
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ertancan/

And huge thanks to this episode’s sponsor, Alchemist Accelerator: https://alchemistaccelerator.com/superclusters

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

Brought to you by Alchemist Accelerator.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[02:21] Ertan’s childhood
[05:36] Why Luxembourg?
[15:03] Which countries do European GPs set up their funds?
[19:46] How did Ertan switch the family office strategy from direct to fund investing?
[24:42] How has Ertan’s underwriting process evolved over time?
[28:04] Do similar pitch deck formats make it easier or harder to make investment decisions?
[30:34] Referrals and warm intros ranked by source
[36:10] Geographies that Multiple Capital invests in
[37:44] Red flags for Multiple Capital
[43:48] How do solo GPs build sounding boards to check their blindside?
[49:04] The (un)predictability of outlier investments
[1:00:41] How does Ertan think about bringing on Venture Partners in a fund of funds?
[1:08:25] The decision-making framework behind an “angel” LP investment and a FoF check
[1:12:01] Where Ertan shares his unfiltered thoughts
[1:20:14] Ertan’s experience around giving GPs feedback
[1:27:05] Cockroaches and superheroes
[1:34:08] Thank you to Alchemist Accelerator for sponsoring!
[1:36:44] If you enjoyed this episode, it would mean the world to us if you gave us a like, comment, or share!

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

“Our work is to increase the probability of having some of the outliers as early as possible in as small as possible funds because like a fund, that will lead to a power law in our portfolio.” – Ertan Can

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

Posted on

The Discipline of Ambition

vr, virtual reality

I’ve never met a founder or fund manager I deeply respected say, “Beggars can’t be choosers.” Or “It is what it is.”

While it wasn’t the first time I’ve heard of the phrase, I liked the way a fund-of-funds GP put it yesterday. “I invest in GPs who can run through walls.”

As an early-stage investor — be it in pre-seed/seed startups or in emerging managers — there is literally no metric, no number, no amount of traction that can truly convince us just by themselves to invest. If there are, you’re too late. The truth is it’s about people. And that failing to get conviction, most of the time is we haven’t find the right person yet to execute against the vision.

It’s about people who move fast.

It’s about people who learn fast.

It’s about people who wow you in ways you don’t expect.

It’s about people who are so smart and learn so quickly that outpace your ability to absorb said information.

It’s about people (at least in the early days) rarely, if ever, hedge.

It’s about people who make us question if our thesis really matters.

It’s about people who compel us to write an angel check for an off-thesis investment.

It’s about people who will succeed whether we back them or not.

It’s about people who are ambitious enough to take on the world, but humble enough to know they don’t know everything.

There’s this line I heard in a recent Tim Ferriss podcast with Martha Beck that I really like. “I don’t know where we’re going, but I know exactly how to get there.” If you have frequent flyer miles on this blog, you know one of my favorite heuristics is Mike Maples’ line. “90% of our exit profits have come from pivots.” The ideas we invest in don’t often look like the ideas that generate us there is literally no metric, no number, no amount of traction that can truly convince — pardon my French — shitloads of money.

In fact, “It is what it is” is a function of ambition. The greater one’s ambition, and the greater the recognition there is for the work it requires to get to that level, the less likely that statement and that mentality will come to fruition. Visionaries question the status quo and challenge it. And no matter what, they’ll figure out a way.

On the flip side, as James Stockdale once put it, “You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end – which you can never afford to lose – with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they may be.”

The discipline of reality

I’ve never seen a great founder or a great investor not be able to intimately explain how amazing their direct and indirect competition is. How they wouldn’t be here if not for others paving the road. In either career and personal growth. Or changing the customer mindset. Or who validated the market for them. Or who created the business model before they did.

After all, it’s extremely easy to share in one’s reality distortion field how everyone else sucks, and that you are the only one who’s doing things right. Failure to recognize what got your competition to where they are today and why their customers and fans love them is a failure to understand and truly appreciate the market you’re serving.

In closing

I spend a lot of time thinking about a Jim Collins’ line, “It is not that beauty is hard to find, it’s that it is easy to overlook.”

It really is. For smart people with degrees in finance and business with C-something-A’s attached to their title, it’s really easy to see what can go wrong. Hell, most companies are default dead when they pitch to us, early-stage investors. As Roelof Botha and Pat Grady put it, “it’s not about figuring out what’s wrong, it’s about figuring out what’s right.”

Photo by Jezael Melgoza 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.

Posted on

How to Get Six Top Quartile Fund of Funds in a Row | Aram Verdiyan | Superclusters | S2E7

aram verdiyan, accolade partners

Aram Verdiyan is a Partner at Accolade. Previously, he worked on the investment team at Andreessen Horowitz. Before that, Aram worked in BD, sales and marketing at Aviatrix, a cloud native enterprise software company. Aram worked at Accolade from 2012 to 2015 as a Senior Investment Associate and at Deloitte Consulting LLP. He holds an M.B.A from the Stanford Graduate School of Business (GSB) and a B.S. from the George Washington University.

You can find Aram on his socials here:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/aramverdi
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aram-verdiyan-8099186/

And huge thanks to this episode’s sponsor, Alchemist Accelerator: https://alchemistaccelerator.com/superclusters

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

Brought to you by Alchemist Accelerator.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[02:36] How did Pejman Nozad influence the way Aram thinks about people
[04:06] Aram’s ‘distance traveled’
[05:45] What did imposter syndrome look like in Aram’s life?
[06:36] How Aram cold emailed his way into Accolade Partners
[09:03] The first case study Aram did at Accolade
[10:10] When track record is NOT just TVPI, DPI, or IRR
[15:05] The case for concentrated fund of funds’ portfolio construction
[22:42] Telltale signs of “great” deal flow
[26:32] When does due diligence start for prospective funds for Accolade?
[27:50] Primary sources of data for Accolade
[29:00] The variables that impact fund of funds’ team size
[30:24] How many fund investments should each individual FoF partner have?
[35:13] The case for consistent check sizes
[36:20] The common mistake GPs make when it comes to LP concentration limits
[41:27] How Accolade started investing in blockchain funds
[44:52] Blockchain engineering talent as a function of bear markets
[47:15] Time horizons for blockchain funds
[50:38] Luck vs skill
[53:41] Aram’s early fundraising days at Accolade
[57:38] Thank you to Alchemist Accelerator for sponsoring!
[1:00:14] If you enjoyed the episode, drop us a like, comment or share!

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

“[When] you’re generally looking at four to five hundred distinct companies, 10% of those companies generally drive most of the returns. You want to make sure that the company that drives the returns you are invested in with the manager where you size it appropriately relative to your overall fund of funds. So when we double click on our funds, the top 10 portfolio companies – not the funds, but portfolio companies, return sometimes multiples of our fund of funds.” – Aram Verdiyan

“We don’t have varying levels of conviction.” – Aram Verdiyan

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

Posted on

The Best Time to Raise from Big LPs

hourglass, time, ticking

Two weeks ago, Ted Seides put out a great blogpost titled: The Investment Office Playbook – What Managers Don’t See. It’s the truth behind the veil of “It’s not you, it’s me” answer that LPs give. And that the best time for managers to be approaching CIOs at institutions happens to be:

  1. 1-2 years after they’re just sworn in (in other words, after they’ve figured out their strategy)
  2. Up to 2-4 years after that period when they’re deploying against that strategy
  3. And around years 11-13 where they’re now restructuring their portfolio after their previous portfolio has been optimized and reached maturity

Last week, Sequoia’s Jess Lee shared a fascinating product-market fit framework. Probably the best breakdown of solutions to problems mapping I’ve seen of late. It echoes much of what I’ve written before, but more eloquently put.

Source: Sequoia Arc’s Product-Market Fit Framework

And the reason I bring this up is not to induce whiplash as you’re reading this blogpost. But that it relates back to when to raise from large LPs. As most of us know, there’s a strong correlation between fundraising as a founder and fundraising as a GP.

The first step is to have a product that large LPs can invest in. As a matter of fact, you need to have a specific product (aka fund strategy) for the LP you wish to court. For example, if a large LP’s minimum check size is $20M and their maximum ownership is 10%, and you’re a $50M fund, you don’t have what they’re looking for. That’s okay. You should never resize your fund purely on an LP’s check size and ownership.

The second is to understand their deployment timeline. In the case of large LPs, like endowments and pensions, that’s usually 2-4 years after a new CIO is sworn in. And years 11-13 when they’re rebalancing their portfolio. For other institutions, like some corporates, it’s actually in the bylaws that every three years, there’s a new Head of Investments. Hell, at Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) — the largest sovereign wealth fund, or at least one of the largest ones — a new CEO is sworn in every five years. So the clock is always ticking.

To the second point, for a large LP:

Years 1-2

When the new CIO is just sworn in, in many ways, that might be the best time to pitch a new paradigm. When the strategy has yet to fully shape up. Will you get many checks during that period? Likely not. Unless you’re a pre-existing trusted relationship of the CIO. But even if you do convince the CIO/team, they’re likely only allocating a very small percentage to that field, which for the most part, should work for you.

The goal of the value proposition, and subsequently the onboarding and tutorial, is to give people the activation energy needed to overcome the customer mindset. As such, it means one’s product can’t just be 10-20% better, but 10X better.

For instance, to get over the “yeah, right” and the “it is what it is” mindset, in the words of NFX’s Omri Drory, “the best way to manipulate energy, and get what you want, is to remove that ‘imagination barrier.'”

As such, the CIO must believe in the new paradigm. In all fairness, this takes more validation and big headlines for a tenured CIO to usually begin to believe these.

Years 2-4 (and 11-13)

They’re deploying against a top-down approach. And just as in years 11-13, they’re looking for the best in class solutions for each vertical. Meaning they’ll talk to hundreds of managers and look through thousands of pitches to pick just a few. Processes are long because they dig deep on these multi-fund relationships, but this is also an opportunity for them to increase the surface area for luck to stick.

While we all know past performance isn’t an indicator of future results, there is a reliance on metrics and the consistency of such metrics. For instance, if one were to take the top 2 investments in your portfolio and bottom 2 investments and throw them out, what does your remaining track record look like?

Or if some of your funds have yet to have meaningful distributions, graduation rates become rather important. Not just that on average, 30% of seed stage deals graduate to Series A. And 30% of Series A to B. But how many of your deals graduate past more than one subsequent round? For example, do more than 10% of your seed deals graduate to Series B? Although, to play my own devil’s advocate, vintages post-2019 have yet to really learn the true impact of loss ratios.

In closing

The truth is it’s hard to tell when the best time is. And oftentimes, it’s just a matter of luck. For one to have the right fund a specific LP is looking for at a time when liquidity is good.

But in many other ways, like Ted suggests in his blogpost, it’s the ability to think from the perspective of an LP that is invaluable and greatly appreciated as an LP.

Photo by Who’s Denilo ? 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.

Posted on

Exit Windows Matter More Than Entry Windows | Jaap Vriesendorp | Superclusters | S2E6

Jaap Vriesendorp is one of the managing partners of Marktlink Capital, an investment manager from the Netherlands investing over $1b into private equity and venture capital funds. Marktlink Capital’s LPs are almost exclusively Dutch (tech) entrepreneurs from companies such as Booking.com, Adyen and Hellofresh. At Marktlink Capital Jaap focusses on selecting venture and growth funds across Europe and the US. Before Marktlink Capital, he spent the majority of his time at McKinsey where he was one of the leaders of McKinsey’s practice for Venture Capital, Unicorns & Startups in Europe. Besides work, Jaap enjoys sports, mountains, technology, comic books, music and art.

He holds an MBA from INSEAD and is a guest lecturer at the Rotterdam School of Management (Erasmus University). He occasionally shares his views on private market investing on Medium.

You can find Jaap on his socials here:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaap-vriesendorp/
Medium: https://medium.com/@jjjvriesendorp

And huge thanks to this episode’s sponsor, Alchemist Accelerator: https://alchemistaccelerator.com/superclusters

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

Brought to you by Alchemist Accelerator.

OUTLINE:

[00:00] Intro
[03:04] The significance of Mount Pinatubo in Jaap’s life
[06:23] One Shell Jackets
[08:45] The entrepreneurial gene in the Vriesendorp family that dates back to Jaap’s grandfather
[14:32] The 1-year time constraint of starting Welt Ventures
[17:43] What did the transition to becoming an investor look like for Jaap
[20:28] The 3 traits that define a community
[24:03] How often does Jaap host events?
[25:30] How does Marktlink Capital have 1000 LPs?
[27:15] What was Marktlink’s pitch to their LPs?
[28:32] What is the typical individual LP’s allocation model to VC/PE?
[29:41] Why is VC/PE uncorrelated to the public markets?
[35:10] The 3 facts that define Welt Ventures’ portfolio construction model
[38:28] Exit windows matter more than entry windows
[42:15] Diversification in PE = Concentration in VC
[47:42] 3 types of emerging GPs that deliver alpha
[49:35] Which European fund has a really unique thesis?
[51:44] Which school did Jaap apply to but not get in?
[53:55] Thank you to Alchemist Accelerator for sponsoring!
[56:31] If anything resonated with you in today’s episode, we’d be honored to earn a like, comment, or share!

SELECT LINKS FROM THIS EPISODE:

SELECT QUOTES FROM THIS EPISODE:

“We set out to achieve three things with the community:

  1. We wanted people to have fun with each other. And when entrepreneurs meet entrepreneurs, good stuff happens even if you don’t bring any content.
  2. We wanted to bring the absolute best type of propositions. So in terms of sales, it means sales almost without being sales where you offer something that people really want.
  3. Organized knowledge in a way that nobody does.” – Jaap Vriesendorp

“85% of returns flow to 5% of the funds, and that those 5% of the funds are very sticky. So we call that the ‘Champions League Effect.’” – Jaap Vriesendorp

“The truth of the matter, when we look at the data, is that entry points matter much less than the exit points. Because venture is about outliers and outliers are created through IPOs, the exit window matters a lot. And to create a big enough exit window to let every vintage that we create in the fund of funds world to be a good vintage, we invest [in] pre-seed and seed funds – that invest in companies that need to go to the stock market maybe in 7-8 years. Then Series A and Series B equal ‘early stage.’ And everything later than that, we call ‘growth.’” – Jaap Vriesendorp

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

Posted on

The Phantom Testimonial Corollary

thumbs up, scenery, testimonial

I’ve always admired the way Mike Maples has thought about backcasting. In summary, he proposes that true innovators are visitors from the future. Or as he puts it: “Breakthrough builders are visitors from the future, telling us what’s coming.” Such that they “pull the present from the current reality to the future of their design.” In other words, start from the future, then work your way backwards to figure out what you need to do today to get there.

And I find it equally as empowering to do the same exercise as an emerging manager. Hell, for any aspiring institutional investor. Be it from an angel to a GP. Or an individual LP to a fund of funds.

Start from your ideal fund model. Your ideal LP base. Your ideal pitch deck. Then work backwards to figure out what you need to do today. For the purpose of this blogpost, I’ll focus on reference checks.

For everyone in the investing world, especially in the early-stage private markets, we all know that reference checks is a key component of making investment decisions. Yet too often, founders and emerging managers alike think about them retroactively. Post-mortem. Testimonials that are often not indicative of one’s strengths. And especially not indicative of how a GP won that investment, as well as how they can win such investments in the future.

An exercise I often recommend investors do is write your ideal reference you would like to get from a founder. Be as specific as you can. What would your portfolio founders say about you? How have you helped them in a way that no one else can? What do founders who you didn’t fund say about you?

Another way to think about it is if you were to own a word — something that would live rent free in people’s minds — what would you own? Hustle Fund owns “hilariously early.” Spacecadet Ventures owns “the marketing VC” and they live up to it. Cowboy’s Aileen Lee created the idea of “unicorns.” “Software is eating the world” is attributed to Marc Andreessen.

On the flip side of the token, what are testimonials that should never be written about you?

Hell, at this point, if you’re an aspiring institutional investor, and have yet to spell things out, create the whole deck. Fill in the numbers and the facts later, but for now, make up your ideal deck. When leading indicators become lagging, then update it and fill it in.

Then be that kind of investor for every founder you help. As Warren Buffett once said, “You should write your obituary and then try and figure out how to live up to it.”

Photo by Nghia Le 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.

Proudly powered by WordPress