Tag: fundraising

Posted on

Startup Growth Metrics that will Hocus Pocus an Investor Term Sheet

Founders often ask me what’s the best way to cold email an investor. *in my best TV announcer voice* Do you want to know the one trick to get replies for your cold email startup pitches that investors don’t want you to know? Ok, I lied. No investor ever said they don’t want founders to know this, but how else am I going to get a clickbait-y question? Time and time again, I recommend them to start with the one (at most two) metrics they are slaying with. Even better if that’s in the subject line. Like “Consumer social startup with 50% MoM Growth”. Or “Bottom-up SaaS startup with 125% NDR”. Before you even intro what your startup does, start with the metric that’ll light up an investor’s eyes.

Why? It’s a sales game. The goal of a cold email is to get that first meeting. Investors get hundreds of emails a week. And if you imagine their inbox is the shelf at the airport bookstore, your goal is to be that book on display. Travelers only spend minutes in the store before they have to go to their departure gate. Similarly, investors scroll through their inbox looking for that book with the cover art that fascinates them. The more well-known the investor, the less time they will spend skimming. And if you ask any investor what’s the number one thing they look for in an investment, 9 out of 10 VCs will say traction, traction, traction. So if you have it, make it easy for them to find.

That said, in terms of traction, most likely around the A, what growth metrics would be the attention grabber in that subject line?

Strictly annual growth

A while back, my friend, Christen of TikTok fame, sent me this tweetstorm by Sam Parr, founder of one of my favorite newsletters out there, The Hustle. In it, he shares five lessons on how to be a great angel investor from Andrew Chen, one of the greatest thought leaders on growth. Two lessons in particular stand out:

And…

Why 3x? If you’re growing fast in the beginning, you’re more likely to continue growing later on. Making you very attractive to investors’ eyes – be it angels, VCs, growth and onwards. Neeraj Agrawal of Battery Ventures calls it the T2D3 rule. Admittedly, it’s not R2-D2’s cousin. Rather, once your get to $2M ARR (annual recurring revenue), if you triple your revenue each year 2 years in a row, then double every year the next 3 years, you’ll get to $100M ARR and an IPO. More specifically, you go from 2 to 6, then 18, 36, 72, and finally $144M ARR. More or less that puts you in the billion dollar valuation, aka unicorn status. And if you so choose, an IPO is in your toolkit.

image001
Source: Neeraj Agrawal’s analysis on public SaaS companies that follow the T2D3 path

For context, tripling annually is about a 10% MoM (month-over-month) growth rate. And depending on your business, it doesn’t have to be revenue. It could be users if you’re a social app. Or GMV if you’re a marketplace for goods. As you hit scale, the SaaS Rule of 40 is a nice rule of thumb to go by. An approach often used by growth investors and private equity, where, ideally, your annual growth rate plus your profit margin is equal to or greater than 40%. And at the minimum, your growth rate is over 30%.

For viral growth, many consumer and marketplace startups have defaulted to influencer marketing, on top of Google/FB ads. And if that’s what you’re doing as well, Facebook’s Brand Collabs Manager might help you get started, which I found via my buddy Nate’s weekly marketing newsletter. Free, and helps you identify which influencers you should be working with.

But what if you haven’t gotten to $2M ARR? Or you’ve just gotten there, what other metrics should you prepare in your data room?

Continue reading “Startup Growth Metrics that will Hocus Pocus an Investor Term Sheet”
Posted on

#unfiltered #46 Soon May the Investor Fund

Not long ago, there was this massive TikTok craze on sea shanties. And while I don’t have a TikTok account, the ripple effects have reached me as well. What started as a shower thought after a founder recommended I gamify my advice to founders fundraising, well… turned into this. To the tune of Soon May the Wellerman Come:

There once was a team that put to sea
The name of that team was Friends ‘N Me
The winds blew hard, but growth tipped up
O’, burn that midnight oil (huh)

Soon may the investor fund
To bring us money and help and some
One day, when the term sheet’s done
We’ll take the dough to grow

She had not been two years from start
When push became the pull we sought
The founder called all hands and wrought
The product to scale now (huh)

Soon may the investor fund
To bring us money and help and some
One day, when the term sheet’s done
We’ll take the dough to grow

The servers’ now a right real mess
We had to call the AWS
They had us pay for more bandwidth
But that’s okay with us (huh)

Soon may the investor fund
To bring us money and help and some
One day, when the term sheet’s done
We’ll take the dough to grow

We’ve tripled our growth last year, oh yus
With dollar retention as one cause
When we were asked what it was
We said ’twas one twenty (huh)

Soon may the investor fund
To bring us money and help and some
One day, when the term sheet’s done
We’ll take the dough to grow

We’ve ten cust’mers that five of which
Are referenceable you’ll find on pitch
That one of which is kinda rich
They’re paying hundy K (huh)

Soon may the investor fund
To bring us money and help and some
One day, when the term sheet’s done
We’ll take the dough to grow

Photo by Katherine McCormack 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!

Posted on

Should you take VC money or just money money?

Not too long ago, I came across a question on Quora that I had to double click on: Why should founders care about VC brand? Money is money, isn’t it? While the question itself seemed to have a come from a less-informed perspective, I found it to be a useful exercise to once again go through the checklist of founder-investor fit.

Money, frankly, is just money. A Benjamin will look the same and work the same as any other Benjamin out there. Assuming you don’t need anything else other than money, I’d recommend other sources of funding other than venture funding, i.e.:

  • (Equity) crowdfunding,
  • Rev share,
  • Angels – high net-worth individuals who write checks in the 1000s to 10s of 1000s of dollars;
    • Also worth looking into, but are representative of the VC model, are super angels and solo capitalists. Many of whom might be leading their own rolling funds (more context) now;
  • SBA Loans;
  • Friends/family – small sums of money, unless your dad is Chamath Palihapitiya;
  • ICO;
  • Government (public) and private grants – really small sums of money, but money nonetheless;
  • Accelerators/incubators – less upfront capital. But the partnerships they have with other startup services save you a lot of money (i.e. AWS, Adobe Suite, etc.);
  • Selling domain names (yes, I have a friend who initially funded his business by doing that, but other than that, I’m kidding);
  • And I’m sure I missed some others out there.

On the other hand, most founders who raise VC funding want something more than just monetary capital, including, but not limited to:

  • Mentorship/advisorship –
    • Ex-operators who can give you tactical advice,
    • Former founders who can empathize with you,
    • VCs who can check your blind side and had previous portfolio founders who have gone through what you’re going through now,
    • People who have access to resources that will aid you on the founding journey (ideally not distract you),
    • And frankly, people who’ll be there for you when you have to make the tough calls,
    • Highly recommend Harry Hurst’s tweet about the CS:H ratio (check size: helpfulness, which I elaborate on here) as a mental model to figure out which VCs depending on fund size/check size can help you the founder the most at the stage you’re at.
  • Network – downstream investors, sales pipeline, potential hires (eng, executives, growth, product, marketing, etc)
  • Brand/PR –
    • If you’re trying to fill up a round, a brand name investor can easily help you fill in the rest of the round with their network and their participation alone. They’ll also help you raise downstream capital – directly or indirectly.
    • It’ll be easier to find customers. With a brand name VC, you also get quite a bit of media attention from Forbes, TC, NY Times, and so on. Customers are more likely to trust you knowing that you’re backed by a recognizable brand, especially the folks on the other side of the chasm on the adoption curve.
    • It’ll be easier to hire world-class talent. Your business, in their mind, is less likely to go out of business tomorrow. And while you’re not looking for candidates who seek stability, it does give the candidates you do want to hire a peace of mind and confidence that you have external validation.

There’s a saying that the difference between a hallucination and a vision is that other people can see the latter. It’s really a chicken and egg problem. I’m not saying a VC’s brand will guarantee the success of your startup, but I do believe it will help, with the underlying assumption that you pick the right VC. Whereas it used to be a differentiator a decade ago, all VCs these days say they’re founder-first or founder-friendly. But unfortunately not all are. They might be if things are going well. But the true tells are what happens when things don’t go well. Here are some of my favorite questions to ask portfolio founders before you work with a VC. And how to find founder-investor fit.

Photo by Luca Bravo 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!

Posted on

The Smoke Signals of a Great Startup From the Lens of the Pitch Deck

best startup pitch deck

Founders often ask me, what slides on my pitch deck do I have to make sure I get right? The short answer, all of them. Then again, if you’re focusing on all of them, you’re focusing on none of them. So I’ll break it down by fundraising stages:

  1. Pre-seed/seed (might as well include angels here too)
  2. Series A/B

Since I spend almost no time in the later stages, I’ll refrain from extrapolating from any anecdotes there.

If you’re using DocSend, you already have the numbers for your deck viewership in front of you. As DocSend’s CEO Russ Heddleston said in his interview with Jason Calacanis, VCs often spend ~3.5 minutes on your deck. Though I’ve never timed myself, it seems to be in the same ballpark for myself as well. After all, it’s the deck that gets the meeting, not the deck that determines if you get funding or not.

Nevertheless, I hope the below contextualizes the time spent beyond the numbers, and what goes on in an investor’s head when we’re skimming through.

Pre-seed/seed

Team

  1. What is the biggest risk this business is taking on?
  2. Is the person who can address the biggest risk of this business on this slide?
    • And does this person have decision-making power?

Let’s say your biggest risk is that you’re creating a market where there isn’t one. Do you have that marketing/positioning specialist – either yourself or on your team – to tackle this problem? As much as I love techies, three CS PhDs are going to give me doubts.

Similarly, the biggest risk for a hypothetical enterprise SaaS business is often a sales risk. Then I need proof either via your network/experience or LOIs (letters of intent) that you have corporations who will buy your product.

Or if it’s a tech risk, I’ll be hesitant if I see two MBAs pursuing this. Even if their first hire is an ML engineer, who owns 2% of the business. Because it doesn’t sound like the one person who can solve the biggest risk for the business has been given the trust to make the decisions that will move the needle.

This might be a bit controversial, but having talked with several VCs, I know I’m not alone here. I don’t care about quantity – number of years in the industry or at X company. Maybe a little more if you were a founding team member who helped scale a startup to $100M ARR. I do care for quality – your earned secret, which bleeds into the next slide.

Solution/product

The million-dollar question here is: What do you know that makes money that everyone else is overlooking, underestimating, or just totally missed? If you’re a frequent reader of this blog, you’ll be no stranger to this question. I’ve talked about it here and here, just to name a few.

Or in other words, having spent time in the idea maze, what is your earned secret? Here are two more ways of looking at it is:

  1. Is there an inflection point you found, as Mike Maples Jr. of Floodgate calls it, in the socio-economic/technological trends that makes the future you speak of more probable?
  2. Is it a process/mental model that you’ve built over X years in the industry that grafts extremely well to an adjacent or a broader industry?

I believe that’s what’ll greatly increase the chances of your startup winning. Or at least hold your incumbents at bay until you reach product-market fit. If you’re able to find the first insight, then you’ll be able to find the second. And by pattern recognition, you’ll be able to find the third, fourth, and fifth in extreme velocity. It’s what we, on the VC side, call insight development. And your product/solution is the culmination of everything you and your team has learned faster and better than your competitors.

Of course, your product still has to address your customers’ greatest pain points. You don’t have to be the best at everything, but you have to be the best (or the only) one who can solve your customers’ greatest frustration. So VCs, in studying how you plot out the user journey, look for: do you actually solve what you claim this massive problem in the market is?

Series A/B

Traction

  • What are your unit economics? I’m looking for something along the lines of LTV:CAC ~3-5x.
  • Who’s paying?
    • For enterprise, which big logo is your customer? And who are your 5-7 referenceable customers?
    • For consumer:
      • If it’s freemium, what percent of premium users do you have? I’m looking for at least a 3-5% here.
      • If your platform is free, how are people paying with their time? DAU/MAU>25-30%? Is your virality coefficient k>1? 30- and 90-day retention cohorts > 20%, ideally 40%.
  • What does your conversion funnel look like? What part of the funnel are you really winning? Subsequently, what might you need more work on?

The competition

95 out of every 100 decks, I see two kinds of competitor slides:

  • 2×2 matrix/Cartesian graph, where the respective startup is on the upper right hand corner
  • The checklist, where the respective startup has all the boxes checked and their competitors have some percentage of the boxes checked

Neither are inherently wrong in nature, but they give rise to two different sets of questions.

The former, the graph, often leads to the trap of including vanity competitors. For the sake of populating the graph, founders include the logos of companies who hypothetically could be their competitors, but when it comes down to reality, they never or rarely compete on a deal with their target user/customer. April Dunford, author of Obviously Awesome, calls these “theoretical competitors.”

A simple heuristic is if you jumped on a call with a customer right now and ask: “What would you use currently if our solution did not exist?”, would the names of the competitors you listed actually pop up during the call? Or with a potential customer, what did they use before you arrived? For enterprise software, Dunford says that startups usually lose 25% of their customers when the answer to the above question is “nothing”. When your greatest incumbent is a habitual cycle deeply engrained in your user’s behavior, you need to either reposition your solution, or find ways to educate the market and greatly reduce the friction it takes to go from 0 to 60.

The latter, the checklist, usually sponsors a second kind of trap – vanity features. Founders often list a whole table’s worth of “awesome features” that their competitors don’t have, but many of which may not resolve a customer’s frustration. And on the one that does, their competitors have already taken significant market share. The key question here: Do all features listed resolve a fundamental problem your customers/users have? Which are necessary, which are nice-to-have’s? Are you winning on the features that solve fundamental problems?

The question I ask, as it pertains to competition, in the first or second meeting is: What are your competitors doing right? If you were to put yourself in your competitor’s shoes, what did they ace and what can you learn from the success of their experiment?

Financial projections

  1. What are you basing the numbers off of?
  2. What are your underlying assumptions?

How fast do you claim you can double the business growth? Is it reasonable? If we’re calculating bottom-up, can you actually sell the number of units/subscriptions you claim to? What partnerships/distribution channels are you already in advanced talks with? Anything further than 2 years out, for the most part, VCs dismiss. The future is highly unpredictable. And the further out it is, the less likely you’re able to predict that.

I also say financial projections for Series A/B decks is because only with traction can you reasonably predict what the 12-month forward revenue is going to look like. Maybe 18 months, depending on your pending contracts as well. In the pre-seed/seed, when you’re still testing out the product with small set of beta users, it’s hard to predict. And pre-seed/seed decks that have projections without much traction are often heavily scrutinized than their counterparts that don’t have that slide.

In closing

Of course, that doesn’t mean you should neglect any slide on your deck. Rather, the above is just a lens for you to see which slides an investor might allocate special attention to. If you can answer the above questions well in your pitch deck, then you’re one step closer to a winning strategy not only in fundraising, but in building a company that will change the world.

Photo by Ricardo Gomez Angel 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!

Posted on

Rolling Funds and the Emerging Fund Manager

library, rolling funds, startup investment

In the past few months, Rolling Funds by AngelList have been the talk of the town. Instead of having to raise a new fund every 2-3 years, fund managers can now continuously accept capital on a quarterly basis, where LPs (limited partners, like family offices or endowments or fund of funds (FoF)) typically invest with 1-2 year minimum commitments. Under the 506c designation, you can also publicly talk about your fundraise as a fund manager. Whereas the traditional Fund I typically took 11 months to fundraise for a single GP (general partner of a VC fund), 11.9 if multiple GPs, now with Rolling Funds, a fund manager can raise and invest out of a fund within a month – and as quick as starting with a tweet. AngelList will also:

  • Help you set up a website,
  • Verify accredited investors,
  • Help set up the fund (reducing legal fees),
  • And with rolling funds, you can invest as soon as the capital is committed per quarter, instead of waiting before a certain percentage of the whole fund is committed as per the usual 506b traditional funds.

Moreover, Rolling Funds, under the same 506c general solicitation rules, are built to scale. Both for the emerging fund manager playing the positive sum game of investing upstream as a participating investor, and for the experienced fund manager who’s leading Series A rounds. In the former example with the emerging fund manager, say a solo GP investing out of a $10M initial fund size, 20 checks of $250K, and 1:1 reserves. Or the latter, $50-100M/partner, writing $2-3M checks. Maybe up to $7-10M for a “hot deal“, which by its nature, are rare and few in between. In the words of Avlok Kohli, CEO of AngelList Venture, Rolling Funds are what funds would have looked like if they “were created in an age of software”.

I’m not gonna lie, Rolling Funds really are amazing. Given the bull case, what is the bear case? And how will that impact both emerging and experienced fund managers?

Continue reading “Rolling Funds and the Emerging Fund Manager”
Posted on

The Four Traits of World-Class Startup Founders

Proportionally speaking, I rarely make referrals and intros. Numerically speaking, I set up more intros than the average person. Frankly, if I made every intro that people have asked of me, I’d be out of social capital. It’s not to say I’m never willing to spend or risk my social capital. And I do so more frequently than most people might find comfortable. In fact, the baseline requirement for my job is to be able to put my neck on the line for the startups I’m recommending. The other side of the coin is that I’ve made more than a few poor calls in my career so far. That is to say, I’m not perfect.

I only set up intros if I can see a win-win scenario. A win for the person who wants to get introduced. And a win for the person they will be introduced to. The clearer I can see it, the easier the intro is to make. The less I can, the more I look for proxies of what could be one.

This largely has been my framework for introducing founders to investors, as well as potential hires, partners, and clients. Over the years, I realized that I’ve also been using the same for people who would like an intro to someone above their weight class.

Below I’ll share the 4 traits – not mutually exclusive – of what I look for in world-class founders.

  1. Insatiable curiosity
  2. Bias to action
  3. Empathy
  4. Promise fulfillment
Continue reading “The Four Traits of World-Class Startup Founders”
Posted on

My Top Questions to Ask Portfolio Founders When Doing Investor Diligence

I’ve recommended in a number of essays on this blog the importance of founder-investor fit. That founders should always do their diligence on potential investors, like here and here. And for a more robust understanding, asking founders in their current and previous portfolio, specifically the ones that didn’t work out. Some of my favorite questions for (ex-)portfolio founders:

  • How has [insert name] been helpful for you in your founder journey?
  • What was [insert name]‘s involvement like when shit hit the fan? Do you remember specific examples?
  • If you were to build another company (if applicable), would you work with [insert name] again?
    • If they are building another company in a relevant field, and if they say “yes”: Why haven’t you?
    • What are scenarios in which you would, and ones you wouldn’t?

Then think to yourself, were those pieces of advice actionable? Did the context help or detract from your initial disposition? Your goal isn’t to point fingers, but to paint a more holistic picture of who you might be working with closely for the long haul.

The best investors can inspire founders to think on wavelengths they might not have considered before. Some may hurt when you first hear them, but if your investors truly care, they mean well. The only reason the truth hurts is because it is the truth. And it’s your job as the founder to do your best to fix it.

The red herring

When a founder responds to the above questions with, “X investor just spent less time with us”, it’s not enough to say that an investor isn’t great.

Each VC always has his/her first and foremost duty and responsibility to the partnership. By simple economics, most of their investments won’t work out. Investors generally understand that they have to:

  1. Spend more time with the winners ’cause they’ll return the fund (and then some, hopefully),
  2. And cap their time commitment with the ones who won’t return the fund.

While that isn’t an excuse for VCs to only focus on maximizing returns (i.e. selling your IP, forcing an acquisition, unjustly firing the founder), it is something that founders should keep in mind. When you raise venture funding, just be aware of the fact that investors need to prioritize their time, especially when the going gets tough. And while it is usually implicit in the investment, a great investor/board member will often have that conversation explicitly with you at the beginning.

This notion, on the other hand, contrasts with angel investors, who are often investing out of their own net worth. So the dynamics, as well as commitment level, for angels is different. Angels often have between tens to hundreds of active investments at a time, meaning their time allocation per startup is much more limited than a VC. For context, a VC is usually actively involved in 3-7 investments at a time, meaning they’re going to be more involved per startup.

In closing

At the end of the day, the world of entrepreneurship, and business more broadly, is a relationship-building industry. And it’s extremely hard for an investor to build great relationships and a reputation if they have a track record of burning bridges. With founders. Even other investors – downstream and upstream.

Photo by Dariusz Sankowski 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!

Posted on

Before the Close – How to Increase the Chance of Raising Capital

A number of founders ask me for fundraising advice. While they come in different magnitudes, one of the common themes is: “I’ve had many investor meetings, but I still can’t get a term sheet. What am I doing wrong? What do I need to do or to say to get a yes?”

To preface, I don’t have the one-size-fit-all solution. Neither do I think there is a one-size-fit-all solution. Each investor is looking for something different. And while theses often rhyme, the “A-ha!” moment for each investor is a culmination of their own professional and life experiences. This anecdote is, by no means, prescriptive, but another perspective that may help you when fundraising, if you’re not getting the results you want. This won’t help you cheat the system. If you still have a shoddy product or an unambitious team, you’re still probably not going to get any external capital.

One thing I learned when I was on the operating side of the table is: When you want money, ask for advice. When you want advice, ask for money. It’s, admittedly, a slightly roundabout way to get:

  1. Investor interest,
  2. And reference points for milestones to hit.

But it’s worked for me. Why? Because you’re fighting in a highly-competitive, heavily-saturated market of attention – investor attention. This method merely helps you increase the potential surface area of interaction and visibility, to give you time in front of an investor to prove yourself.

Investors are expected to jump into a long term marriage with founders, while, for the most part, only given a small cross-section in your founding journey to evaluate you. It’s as if you chose to marry someone for life you’ve only met 60-90 days ago. While angels and some people have the courage and the conviction to do that, most investors like to err on the side of caution. Contrary to popular belief, venture capitalists are extremely risk-averse. They look for risk-adjusted bets. And if you can prove to them – either through traction or an earned secret – that you’re not just a rounding error, you’ll make their lives a lot easier.

So, let me elaborate.

When you want money, ask for advice.

As you’re growing your business and you want to show you are, ask investors for advice. Tell them. “So I’ve been growing at X% MoM, and I’ve gotten to Y # of users. I’m thinking about pursuing this Z as my next priority. And this is how I plan to A/B test it. What do you think?”

And if you keep these investors in the loop the entire time and ask and follow-up on their advice, at some point, they’d think and ask, “Damn, this is an epic business. Will you just take my money?”

So, what are good numbers?

The Rule of 40 is a rough rule of thumb many investors use for consumer tech markets. Month-over-month growth rate plus profit should be greater than or equal to 40. So you can be growing 50% MoM, but burning money with -10% profit, aka costs are greater than your revenue. Or you can be growing 30% MoM, but gaining 10% profit every month. And if you’ve got 10s of 1000s of users, you’re on solid ground. Better yet, one of the biggest expenses is increasing server capacity costs.

For more reference points on ideal consumer startup numbers, check out this blog post I wrote last year.

For enterprise/B2B SaaS, somewhere along the lines of 10-15% MoM growth. With at least 1 key customer logo. And 5 publicly referenceable customers.

Of course, the Rule of 40 did not age well for certain industries in 2020.

When you want advice, ask for money.

When you ask for money most of the time, investors, partners, and potential customers will say no, especially if you’re super early on and don’t have a background or track record as an entrepreneur. So when they do say no, I like to ask them one of my favorite questions: “What do I need to bring you for you to unconditionally say yes?” Then, they’ll tell me what they want to see out of our product or our business. These, especially if they’re reinforced independently across multiple different individuals in your ecosystem, should be your North Star metrics. And when you do put their advice to action, be sure to follow up with the results to their implemented advice.

  1. You either do what they recommended. And show them what happened. And what’s next.
  2. Or you don’t do what they recommended. But show that you heavily considered their recommendation. What you did instead. Why you chose to do what you did instead. And what’s next.

To take it one step further, once I ask the above question to have a reference point for growth trajectory, I ask: “Who is the smartest person(s) known to achieve X (or in Y)?” with X being the answer you got via the previous question. And Y being the industry you’re tackling.

For instance, I’d recommend:

Then, go to that person or those people and say, “Hey Jennifer, [investor name] said if there’s one person I had to talk to about X, I have to talk to you.” Feel free to use my cold email “template” as reference, if you’re unsure of what else to say.

If you use this tactic again and again, eventually you’ll build a family of unofficial (maybe even official) mentors and advisors, even if you never explicitly call them that. Not necessarily asking for money all the time. But asking for money might help you ignite the spark for this positive feedback loop.

In closing

When I was on the operating side, a brilliant founder with 2 multi-million dollar exits once told me: “Always be selling. Always be fundraising. And always be hiring.”

I didn’t really get it then. In fact, I didn’t get it the entire time I was on the other side of the table. What do you mean “Always be fundraising”? Should I just be asking for money all the time? What about the business?

It wasn’t until I made my way into VC at SkyDeck that I realized the depth of his words. Keep people you eventually want to fundraise from and hire in the loop about what you’re building. Keep them excited. Build a relationship beyond something transactional. Build a friendship.

Jeff Bezos put it best when he said:

“If everything you do needs to work on a three-year time horizon, then you’re competing against a lot of people. But if you’re willing to invest on a seven-year time horizon, you’re now competing against a fraction of those people, because very few companies are willing to do that.

“At Amazon we like things to work in five to seven years. We’re willing to plant seeds, let them grow and we’re very stubborn. We say we’re stubborn on vision and flexible on details.”

Photo by Frame Harirak 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!

Posted on

The Double-Edged Sword of Transparency, when Fundraising

In the venture world, startups have another alias. 10-year overnight successes.

For the majority of the world, we hear about startups through a Thursday morning TechCrunch article or by way of the Friday Happy Hour gossip stream. Well, okay, I’m not being time sensitive. We’re not going out for Friday night happy hours these days. But we might spy something in our social feeds after a startup hits 5 million users or they just raised $50 million from a top-tier venture firm.

And these TC or Forbes or NY Times articles paint these founding CEOs to almost be perfect individuals. Good news. They’re not. They’re human – just like you and me. Over the years, the more I’ve gotten to know these leaders, the more I realized how similar we are. How similar they were when they were where I am today. And even now, how they still feel the unease in the uncertainty in the world. My study last week on how people are living through the pandemic – what inspires them or what frustrates them – further illustrated our similarities. An animator who’s fought against doubt. An executive who lost his grandpa, broke up, and felt lost in the corporate politics. A founder who was forced to make the tough decision of leaving his team. And much more.

What’s that one analogy people use again – to show that everyone is living a life we know nothing about?

A duck, above the surface, perfectly calm and composed. Underwater, furiously paddling to stay afloat.

The double-edged sword

The good news is that most VCs know that founders aren’t perfect human beings. The bad news is the irony. On one hand, they know that founders aren’t perfect and should be willing to be vulnerable. On the other hand, too much vulnerability means that VC’s say, “I’m out.”

In many cases, investors may seem hypocritical. And arguably, there’s a handful of them who don’t even know what they’re looking for themselves. Yet, in most scenarios, the bargaining chip is on the investors’ end. Not with the founders. It’s frustrating. I know. I’ve talked to founders and will continue to talk with founders who feel that way. So, what is that fine line between the showing “perfection” and embracing imperfection?

Making the blade that works for you

When founders ask, this is what I tell them.

  1. Be upfront with your investors if you’re incompetent on an aspect or aspects of the business.
  2. Show them you’re competent… in finding a way to be competent.

Be upfront with your investors if you’re incompetent on an aspect or aspects of the business.

Address the elephant in the room. If you don’t bring it up, they’re bound to ask. Or worse yet, if they don’t ask, it’s going to be gnawing at them in their minds. And may end up being the main contributing factor to a “No”.

Show them you’re competent… in finding a way to be competent.

Early-stage VCs usually take between 2-4 months before they go from “Hi, my name is Buttercup” to “Take my money”. And here are the steps:

  • Coffee chat, aka “Hi, my name is Buttercup” (If you’re wondering why “Buttercup”, there’s a story behind there, but another day. Or if anyone’s dying to know, DM me or ask me in the comments below.)
  • 2nd meeting with same individual partner (maybe a +1)
  • Full partnership meeting
  • Diligence
  • Term sheet, aka “Take my money”

Lesson 1: Don’t skip steps (for the most part). What do I mean? When you’re having a coffee chat, your goal should not be to get a term sheet there. Your goal is should be to get to meeting 2. Think of it like a sales funnel.

Lesson 2: Learn and grow during the time you get to know an investor. Doers > thinkers. Hustle. Be scrappy, resourceful. At each step, the VC(s) are evaluating if you have the acumen, competency, and what Sequoia Capital calls it – a bias towards action.

Let’s analogize with the equation of a line: y = mx +b. We measure a founder’s competency not just at “b”, but a greater emphasis on “m”. And over the course of the time we get to know each other, if a founder can prove that to us. For me, after the first meeting, I usually give a couple pieces of advice. “Oh, you should really talk with Sarah. She’s really good at sales.” Or. “Have you thought about this UX improvement in the user journey?”

What I’m looking for, by the time we have our second meeting, is what have they done in the mean time. And for a great founder, there are 2 possibilities:

  1. They acted on the advice, and they come back with the results.
  2. They heavily considered the piece of advice. Did something else. Explained to me why they did something else. And also share the results of that decision.

In both scenarios, they have new results by the time we meet. They don’t have to be “right”, as if I’m even a person who can evaluate what’s right versus wrong. But they do have to learn fast. Hustlers make mistakes. And through the mistakes, they learn. Fast. It’s a preamble to what working with a VC looks like.

If you’re curious, Chris Moody at Foundry Group has a brilliant 3-part series of why you shouldn’t take money from a VC. In his first reason to not, if you want to build a lifestyle business. Otherwise, you’ve got to learn fast and be scrappy.

Here’s an example of scrappiness

When I was an operator, we were strapped for cash and looking for cash, so we didn’t have much of a budget for marketing and advertising. Admittedly, we also didn’t really know how to market the business. Minus a few theoretical classes, we knew nothing.

We used free student printing (for us up to 10,000 pages) to print out flyers we made by ourselves. Given that our audience included both SMBs and millennial/Gen Z’s looking for jobs, as much as we wanted to flyer to college students at the plaza or in front of local businesses, we knew it wouldn’t be smart. ’Cause everyone else was doing so.

So then it came down to the question: where do people have plenty of attention to spend but have not yet been saturated with information. For us, it was the bathroom. Specifically, in the stalls. When you’re locked inside the bathroom, doing your business, you either look at the door in front of you and/or at your cellphone. And the doors were often blank canvases. So we decided to stick our flyers on the backsides of these stall doors – both in the dorms and in public restrooms, which inevitably got our websites 10s of 1000s of views early on.

That said, the janitorial staff tore down our flyers every night at 11pm. So we had to be back on the streets and sticking in flyers in public and dorm bathrooms every morning at 5am. And it so happens, I once talked to one of the university’s janitorial staff members and he actually said thanks. Since he found his new job via a flyer he kept having to rip off.

As the economist Herbert A. Simon says, “a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention.” As an entrepreneur, you’re looking for the margins, where there is a poverty of information and a wealth of attention.

In closing

I can only speak from my perspective and what I seek in founders. But having talked and learned from a number of investors who have a track record for returning >5x MOIC (multiple on invested capital), I know I’m not alone.

It’s okay to be vulnerable of the potholes ahead – to not know how to do certain things. We’re human. It’s okay. But show that you have at least have a hypothesis on how to learn those things.

Photo by Ricardo Cruz 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!

Posted on

The Punchline

comedy, the punchline, fundraising, vc

“Hey, y’all wanna hear a joke?” one of my teammates in my lane asks during warm-up. If there was the equivalent of a class clown in the pool, that’d be him.

“Why not?” the rest of us answer, hoping to spice up the impending 2-hour practice.

“So, there’s this guy who’s about to ask this girl out to the school dance. But to do so, he’s gotta ask her out on Valentine’s Day. So the day before, he goes to buy a Valentine’s gram during lunch. Turns out – there’s a long, long line.”

Our coach blows the whistle, and we sprint off. When we touch again, he goes on, “And there’s a separate line to buy the roses. So, he heads over, and turns out – there’s a long, long line.”

Again, the whistle goes off, and upon return, “So, he finishes buying his gram and roses. On the fateful day, she gets it all and says yes. Super excited, the guy prepares for the school dance. First he goes to buy his tux. When he arrives at the tailor-“. He pauses, beckoning us to finish his sentence.

“There’s a long, long line,” we chime in. In the distance we hear, “Lane 1. Stop talking!” Whistle blows, and we go…

And return. “He gets his suit tailored. Now he goes to Office Depot to buy his cue cards and markers to ask her out. But when he gets to the cash register…”

“There’s a long, long line.” And a kickboard comes flying in and smacks two of us in the face. “Quiet!” a distant shout.

“Day of the ask, he assembles all his friends, lines them up for a dramatic prom ask. And what do you know?”

“There’s a long, long line.” Another one of us feels the sting of hard foam across our face.

“The girl says yes. And now, finally the day of the prom arrives, and he picks her up. Together, they take pictures with everyone else, in a-“

“Long, long line.”

“Then they all drive to the destination of prom. But turns out they’re not the first ones there. Ahead-“

“There’s a long, long line.” At this point we were too vested in the joke. Each of us with bruises across our face – just short of our coach dragging us out of the water to discipline us.

“So the boy and girl finally make it into the dance hall, and while they’re waiting for the dance floor to open up, the boy asks us the girl, ‘Can I get you something to drink?’ And she says, ‘Sure.’ So, he goes over to where the fruit punch is. And, turns out…”

“There’s a long, long-“

“Nope, there’s no punch line.”

The bigger picture

I hear so many founders tell me they’re pursuing this billion dollar market. Or even a trillion dollar one with a capital T. And how they plan to capture 10% of this huge market in 5 years. I mean, c’mon, how awesome would 10% of this billion dollar market sound for our returns?

For an investment of anywhere between $1 and $10 million, let’s say $1 million (’cause this is usually something people raising a pre-seed/seed say), 10% of $100B market is $10B. And for the ease of calculation, let’s say by the time the founders exit, we still have 10%, 10% of $10B is $1B. For only $1M invested, $1B is a 1000x return. Wowza!

The true let-down happens when they finally share what their solution is. And it turns out to only address a small fraction of their total addressable market (TAM). Here’s a hypothetical example. A team is tackling a TAM for events of $1.1 trillion (2018 number). They talk about how awesome a CAGR of over 10% is. And how virtual events are the new trend and might accelerate that number even more. I’m thinking, “Hell ya, this’ll be epic.”

Then their product – the punchline… an app that streamlines coffee service at events in 2020. While this may or may not be an exaggeration, many startups find their pitches in a similar format. On one end, as a founder, you want to tackle the biggest market you can – to attract investors hoping to make large returns. On the other end, you want to be realistic with your expectations, as well as your investors’. Often times, it’s a fine line. I get it, which is why I suggest approaching market-sizing from the angle of pragmatic optimism.

The GTM strategy

After you share such a lofty goal, the inevitable question comes along: “What is your go-to-market (GTM) strategy?” The usual answer is some permutation of the below:

  • Google/Facebook/other ads,
  • Get it on the App Store (and/or Play Store),
  • (Pay for) SEO,
  • Hire a C_O (fill in the blank)
  • Hire a growth hacker,
  • Or more engineers, or for that matter, anyone,
  • We were hoping you (the investor) could help us with that, once you fund us. 🙁

But who are we kidding? No one. While none of the above answers are unilaterally incorrect, all the above show characteristics of someone who isn’t a hustler, who isn’t scrappy, and who probably isn’t one to scale a business. A pitch deck is designed to be short. I get it. There’s a lot you can’t fit on to it. But I’m not alone when I say this, we want to see the why and the how behind the what. A bit of Simon Sinek‘s two cents – start with why.

  • Why are you hiring more people? To do what?
  • Why did you choose Google over Facebook ads? Over Reddit, Instagram, Tiktok, you-name-it ads? Over traditional billboards?
  • What is the end goal?
  • What is the core metric you’re optimizing for? In the near term? In the long term? Before your next fundraise?

Just to be clear, just because a founder approaches market analysis from a top-down approach doesn’t instantly disqualify him/her. But it is a red flag. That’s why I’m a huge proponent of bottoms-up market-sizing.

Bottoms-up… and Cheers!

How many customers do you plan to have by the end of this year? By the end of next year? The year after?

How much do you plan to sell your product/service for? How will customer acquisition cost (CAC) get cheaper over the next few years? What will you need to do for CAC to get cheaper?

Eventually, you build out this road map of what the next few quarters and years will look like. You, effectively, plot out, here are the next few milestones we need to hit as a team. And those milestones are quantifiable and actionable – a clear sense of direction for your team and for your investors. Of course, as any road map goes, all subject to change depending on the situation.

In closing

Just like a great joke, you, the founder, need to be capable of delivering the punchline in your pitch deck. The build-up is the problem in the market and the world-class team you’ve assembled, as well as why it means so much to you. The punchline is the solution you’re building. Always, make sure your punchline delivers.

  1. It’s relevant to the rest of the (comedic) routine.
  2. When it hits , it’s at the minimum, satisfying, as a climax. At the maximum, like a world-class punch, it knocks the wind out of your audience.

In the words of Robert McKee, a Fullbright Scholar who’s coached over 60 Academy Award winners, 170 Emmy recipients, among numerous others,

“At story climax, you must deliver a scene beyond which the audience can imagine no other.”

Your punchline, your product, by the time you deliver your pitch’s climax, must deliver a utopia beyond which your investors can imagine no other.

Photo by Ben White 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!

Proudly powered by WordPress