Humans are one of the most awe-inspiring creatures that have ever graced this planet. Even though we don’t have the sharpest claws or toughest skins nor can we innately survive -50 degrees Fahrenheit, we’ve crafted tools and environments to help us survive in brutal nature. But arguably, our greatest trait is that we’re capable of writing huge epics that transcend our individual abilities and contributions. And share these narratives to inspire not only ourselves but the fellow humans around us.
A member of the our proud race, founders are no different. They are some of the greatest forecasters out there. To use Garry Tan’s Babe Ruth analogy, founders have the potential of hitting a home run in the direction they point. They build worlds, universes, myths and realities that define the future. They live in the future using the tools of today. In fact, there’s a term for it. First used by Bud Tribble in 1981 to describe Steve Jobs’ aura when building the Macintosh – the reality distortion field.
Yet, we humans are all prone to anxiety. A story nonetheless. Simply, one we tell ourselves of the future that restricts our present self’s ability to operate effectively. Anxiety comes in many shapes and sizes. For founders, one of said anxieties is attempting and worrying about the future without addressing the reality today. In the early days, it’s attempting scale before achieving product-market fit (PMF). Building a skyscraper without surveying the land – land that may be quicksand or concrete.
Here are four signs – some may not be as intuitive as the others:
Having lived under the proverbial rock for most of my adult life from music, I recently learned of the late Warren Zevon. Particularly in his last appearance on his friend David Letterman’s show in 2002. He had been diagnosed with terminal mesothelioma. In other words, lung cancer, with about a year to live.
Letterman asked him one rather profound question, “From your perspective now, do you know something about life and death that maybe I don’t know now?”
And Zevon responds back with an equally, if not more profound answer, “Not unless I know how much-… how much you’re supposed to enjoy every sandwich.”
Needless to say, I was quite intrigued, which I wasn’t shy about sharing with my friends. One of such conversations was with my mentor. Someone who had followed Zevon’s career with a higher-powered magnifying glass than I did. And, he said, if I were to truly appreciate Zevon’s craft, I had to listen to his song Hit Somebody!.
Hit Somebody!
The song is about Buddy, a Canadian farm boy, scouted to be a goon, whose role on the hockey team is to defend the the top scorers of the team. Needless to say, dirty and violent play is part of the job description. While Buddy greatly distinguishes himself in his role, even to be hailed as the “king of the goons”, he wishes to be someone greater.
“Coach,” he’d say, “I wanna score goals” The coach said, “Buddy, remember your role The fast guys get paid, they shoot, they score Protect them, Buddy, that’s what you’re here for
[…]
He never lost a fight on his icy patrol But deep inside, Buddy only dreamed of a goal He just wanted one damn goal
After “twenty years of waiting”, one game, he finally gets the chance. He shoots. And he scores, after getting dropped to the ice by a Finnish goon. And in his dying breath, in a poetic sense of wordplay.
‘Cause the last thing he saw was the flashing red light He saw that heavenly light
My thoughts
We often identify ourselves by our job title. In college by our major. In grade school by our grades and extracurriculars. By our past accomplishments, and not enough on those to come. We’re so often trapped in our own microcosm of “rules” and labels. Rules either society has reinforced or rules that we have capped our own potential with.
But that is exactly why I bet on people who live in the future. Because those ambitious enough to dream are the ones who are most likely going to turn those dreams into reality.
That is exactly why I bet on founders. Founders who are like Buddy. Those who don’t let conventional wisdom sway their ability to dream. Those who don’t let titles and labels parameterize their ability to act on dreams.
I, admittedly, don’t follow hockey closely. And some of the jargon in Zevon’s song, I had to do a double take with my mentor and Google. But I can’t help but appreciate the clever choice of words as well as the emotional impact in the lyrics. Which makes sense for Hit Somebody! and Warren Zevon to have a cult following in the international hockey community.
#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!
Last week, I was lucky enough to jump on a call with the founder of Pulley, Yin Wu. Backed some of the best investors out there including Stripe, General Catalyst, YC, Elad Gil, just to name a few, Pulley is the ultimate tool for cap table management. In addition, Yin is a 4-peat founder, one of which led to an acquisition by Microsoft, and three of which, including Pulley, went through YC.
In our conversation, we covered many things, but one particular theme stood out to me the most: how she built a culture of ruthless prioritization.
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.
I wrote an essay about the three types of mentors exactly a year ago. Peer. Tactical. Strategic.
Peer mentor – Someone who has a similar level of experience as you do in a given field.
Tactical mentor – Someone who is 2-5 years ahead in experience, and someone who can check your blind side. Because they have gone through similar situations as you are currently going through not too long ago, they can provide context as to the variables (core and confounding) involved.
Strategic mentor (which I formerly called veteran mentor) – Someone who has attained success in a particular field as you would define it. While they won’t be able to help you in the play-by-play, they can provide the bigger picture – the macroscopic view. Assessing and reassessing your long-term goals – your true north.
Rocks, pebbles, sand
Many of you might be no stranger to the rocks, pebbles, sand analogy. As the metaphor goes, if your life were a jar, you’d want to fill it with rocks first, then pebbles, then sand. If you start off filling your life with sand, you will have no more space for rocks and pebbles. Similarly, if you start filling it with pebbles, you will only have space left for sand, but not rocks. Analogized, rocks are your life and career’s most important projects and milestones. Pebbles are the smaller projects that lend itself to the whole, some of which you could do without. Sand represents the day-to-day, week-to-week ups and downs.
Rocks
Strategic mentors are most useful once a year (or at best 2-3 times/year) to see if you’re aligned with your goals. They help you set the large milestones you want to accomplish in your life.
What matters?
What doesn’t?
Pebbles
Tactical mentors, you seek after you come up with a few solutions/hypotheses that you would like to test. You don’t seek them as often, but they can help provide context to what you’re going through now, largely from their own experience having gone through it recently.
What variables am I overlooking or underestimating their effects on the outcome? Or simply put, what could go wrong?
Sand
You seek peer mentors before you come up with your solution and in problem-solving mode. These are the mentors you’re going to be spending the most time with. And most likely, the most abundant category of your mentors.
How would you attempt to resolve this dilemma? What would you do if you were in my shoes?
What are new, innovative ways I can use to tackle this problem?
While they vary in their sizes, each rock, pebble and sand is necessary to live your most fulfilling life.
In closing
Over the years, I’ve had the great fortune of having some amazing mentors and mentor figures that have shone me the proverbial light when alone, I may have struggled to find. Yet equally so, I’ve met their antithesis. Luckily very few, but nevertheless. People who don the mantle of being a mentor, but cannot tolerate your success when you surpass them. The latter I met years ago when I indiscriminately and naively sought out mentors, for the pure sake of just having “mentors”. Arguably, as a foolhardy contest of ego and pride, specifically to compensate my feelings of ineptitude.
A mentor like a friend is someone who is happier and wishes for your success than sometimes you do for yourself. Often, independent of their own escape velocity. Simply put, they invest in your success. And of course with that pretext, they are a scarcity. Even of those are willing and free enough to be mentors, given the volume of their inbound, understandably, their response rate is exceedingly low.
While that fact shouldn’t deter you from seeking mentorship, it makes me cherish the time, effort, and advice I have been fortunate enough to receive.
In the words of Tom Landry, legendary head coach of the Dallas Cowboys, “A coach is someone who tells you what you don’t want to hear, who has you see what you don’t want to see, so you can be who you have always known you could be.”
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!
Taking it a bit further, what is one skill that they have that made all their other skills much easier to acquire and/or hone? And I could only come up with one answer, which is understood in various nominations. Resourcefulness. Scrappiness. Creativity under pressure. Staying lean. Frankly, their ability to hustle.
“The best network”
What is the best network for developing entrepreneurial skills?
The simple answer: One you build yourself.
The longer answer…
Entrepreneurship is a career that requires you to hustle. Likewise, a network you build yourself from reaching out and cold emailing has the potential to be stronger than even the best of networks out there. But entrepreneurship can come in two flavors: a hobby and a lifestyle.
A hobby or a lifestyle?
If entrepreneurship is a hobby, there are amazing collaborative:
Slack groups,
Subreddits,
Facebook groups,
Quora spaces,
Meetup groups,
Conferences/trade shows/expos,
You name it, it’s out there.
But it will be akin to sitting in a classroom and learning the theory and conceptualizations.
If entrepreneurship is a lifestyle, you need to learn by application. And unfortunately, you’ll need to develop scar tissue from making real mistakes outside the classroom. You need to hustle and find what works and doesn’t work for you. Two of my favorite venture firms, 1517 Fund and Hustle Fund, invest in founders who do exactly that. Unlike many other venture funds, it’s in their thesis. Learn by doing. Learn by hustling. While there is merit in literature and academic institutions, you are learning at the pace of the system. And when you’re a founder, often times, time is not on your side.
In a parallel, an entrepreneur once described the bifurcation as a “lean-back” versus a “lean-in” activity. A “lean-back” activity would be watching a sitcom, picking strawberries, or typing a simple response to an email chain. Whereas a “lean-in” would be playing football, playing a competitive first-person shooter game, or fixing a bug in the code 2 hours before a product launch. Entrepreneurship, as you might guess, is a “lean-in” sport. So is networking.
There are two French words I often allude to – savoir and connaître. Both mean to understand. Savoir means to understand on a superficial, factual level. Connaître means to know on a deeper, emotional level – to be deeply familiar with. As an entrepreneur, the lifestyle you choose is often not passive, but an active one, or some might argue, an aggressive one. One where the clock started ticking before you started. Sometimes, before you were even born. Ben Horowitz makes a brilliant comparison between a peacetime and a wartime CEO. From his piece, I’ll quote two of his juxtapositions:
“Peacetime CEO knows that proper protocol leads to winning. Wartime CEO violates protocol in order to win.”
“Peacetime CEO has rules like ‘we’re going to exit all businesses where we’re not number 1 or 2.’ Wartime CEO often has no businesses that are number 1 or 2 and therefore does not have the luxury of following that rule.”
Where you’re required to make decisions in difficult times, and if you don’t understand a concept or a skill to the level where it’s engrained in your bone, you will fumble more often than you run touchdowns. Part of the reason why second-time, third-time entrepreneurs usually perform better than first-time entrepreneurs.
I graduated from a stellar university, UC Berkeley, located at one of the epicenters of Silicon Valley/Bay Area, where I got my economics degree and a certification in entrepreneurship and technology. I took a number of classes that allowed me “to learn and hone” my entrepreneurship skills. While there were a handful, I came out feeling I was equipped with the knowledge to take on the world. When I put them to the test, I realized I knew nothing. When faced with reality, I didn’t know how to deal with edge cases since edge cases are rarely taught in the classroom.
Most communities and classes teach entrepreneurship skills in abstractions, making it easier to understand. Even this blog post is, in many ways, an abstraction. They rarely teach the edge cases ’cause frankly, there are too many “what if’s”. But as an entrepreneur, you need to be ready for the “what if’s”. For anything and everything. And over time, what transcends the individual skills you have is having a mental model to hedge yourself from future edge cases.
I once asked someone what being an expert meant. And I really liked his answer, as it stuck with me all these years. He said, “An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes in a very narrow field.”
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 tech world, particularly Silicon Valley, in the past 2 decades, has accelerated its growth ’cause of one mantra: “Move fast and break things.” Some of the most valuable products we know today were built because of that. Facebook, whose founder coined the phrase. Google. Amazon. LinkedIn. Uber. The list goes on. In sum, be “agile”. Simultaneously, I see founders, on the regular, take this mental model too far. They move fast, but they rarely give enough time to test their hypotheses.
Equally so, some companies cannot afford to “break things”. Take Dropbox, for example. Ruchi Sanghvi, founder of the South Park Commons Fund, former VP of Operations at Dropbox, and Facebook’s earliest female engineer, told VentureBeat in 2015, “Quality is really, really important to Dropbox, and as a result we needed to move slower — not slowly, but slower than Facebook.” Ruth Reader, who wrote for VentureBeat at the time, further extrapolated, “What was right for Facebook — fast-paced iteration and fixing bugs in real time — didn’t work for DropBox, an application people entrusted with personal documents like wedding photos or the first draft of a novel. What was valuable to DropBox was the details.”
On the other extreme, there are founders who spend day after day, week after week, and sometimes year after year, pursuing the “perfect” product before launching. If they were right on the money before, by the time they launch 6 months later, they might be 6 months off the money. Take the situation we’re all in today for example – the pandemic. No one could have predicted it. In fact, I had many a few predictions before the pandemic, which all proved to be unfortunately wrong.
The Marketplace of Startups, written on February 24, 2020 – I alluded to an opinion I held that consumer social was almost dead. The consumer app market had become so saturated that it was hard for new players to play in.
Myths around Startups and Business Ideas, written on October 12, 2020 – Pre-COVID, I was more bullish on Slack than Zoom as a public stock investment. History proved otherwise.
… and more to come. Mistakes are inevitable. And “the rear view mirror is always clearer than the windshield”, as Warren Buffett would describe. Seth Godin said in his recent interview on The Tim Ferriss Show: “Reassurance is futile because you never have enough of it.”
At the end of the day, as a startup founder, your raison d’être is creating value in the world where there wasn’t before. As Bill Gates puts it: “A platform is when the economic value of everybody that uses it, exceeds the value of the company that creates it.” Analogized, your startup is that platform.
So, in this post, using the lessons from other subject-matter experts (SMEs), I’ll share how startup teams can balance speed with intentionality in their go-to-market (GTM) strategy.
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:
Investor interest,
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.
You either do what they recommended. And show them what happened. And what’s next.
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.
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.”
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!
As a venture scout and as someone who loves helping pre-seed/seed startups before they get to the A, I get asked this one question more often than I expect. “David, do you think this is a good idea?” Most of the time, admittedly, I don’t know. Why? I’m not the core user. I wouldn’t count myself as an early adopter who could become a power user, outside of pure curiosity. I’m not their customer. To quote Michael Seibel of Y Combinator,
… “customers are the gatekeepers of the startups world.” Then comes the question, if customers are the gatekeepers to the venture world, how do you know if you’re on to something if you’re any one of the below:
Pre-product,
Pre-traction,
And/or pre-revenue?
This blog post isn’t designed to be the crystal ball to all your problems. I have to disappoint. I’m a Muggle without the power of Divination. But instead, let me share 3 mental models that might help a budding founder find idea-market fit. Let’s call it a tracker’s kit that may increase your chances at finding a unicorn.
I’ve had this long-standing belief – which if you’re a regular reader of this blog, you’re no stranger to – that founders need to have a personal vendetta when building a business. They must have something to prove or someone they’d want to prove to. Building a business is finding where selfishness meets selflessness. In fact, I’d argue that’s true in every ideal professional career.
The path of entrepreneurship is one where resilience is the floor, not the ceiling. While I understand, it is not the only career path that carries this trait, it is the one I am most familiar with. And having asked 31 people, 18 of which are or have been entrepreneurs, I’ve learned that everyone, despite their job title or background, can be scared in the face of obstacles. Everyone feels fear, myself included. The question is what do we do next, after the feeling of fear enters our heart and mind.
