[HN Gopher] Investors won't give you the real reason they are pa...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Investors won't give you the real reason they are passing on your
       startup
        
       Author : bx376
       Score  : 18 points
       Date   : 2024-05-03 06:52 UTC (16 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
        
       | fellowniusmonk wrote:
       | tldr. Your team isn't impressive enough.
        
       | barrenko wrote:
       | The significant other won't tell you why they cheat on you, the
       | employer won't tell you why they picked that other guy / gal.
       | Your grandma doesn't know why you're her favorite grandkid.
        
       | rootsudo wrote:
       | Of course, that is because in case you are a unicorn on next pass
       | they didn't throw you under the bus. So you'll chat with them and
       | like them.
       | 
       | It's the expression: "if you don't have anything nice to say,
       | don't say anything at all."
       | 
       | The Silicon Valley tv series has this great when Eric Baurich
       | goes from begging to being mean and that's is a great example of
       | this.
       | 
       | Same for anything, employment, dating, friends, etc.
        
       | theideaofcoffee wrote:
       | It's like job hunting in a way too, they can reject you, but
       | you're also interviewing them for their resources and fit too.
       | Why shouldn't I just ignore them if they ignore me? If we do
       | happen to grow to a point where they'll come crawling back
       | begging to be part of thE nExT rOUnd, isn't that a signal that I
       | shouldn't even bother? They did tip their hand first...
       | 
       | I don't know why I would give them the time of day, same as I
       | would anywhere that rejected me for a job but later had a change
       | of heart.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | > _Why shouldn't I just ignore them if they ignore me?_
         | 
         | Generally speaking, running a business is an exercise in
         | pragmatism. Rejecting capital simply because they once slighted
         | you is closer to a personal issue for a therapist than anything
         | which belongs in the office. (Also, have you never heard of a
         | happy couple who didn't hit it off the first time they met?)
        
           | ethanwillis wrote:
           | What does Sony know about investing in a bakery?
        
       | erichmond wrote:
       | The interesting part here is that it's actually a two-sided
       | marketplace. Most investors aren't "impressive" either, and thus
       | they'll often not be able to get into the best deals because they
       | have no value add.
        
         | fakedang wrote:
         | I recently read some reviews of investors in SV. Some name
         | brand investors like Jason Calacanis, Pejman Nozad, and some YC
         | alumnus, are all actually very clueless people, often with
         | acerbic behaviors to boot. In that respect, at least the
         | investor class of Wall Street seems to have a much higher
         | degree of expertise and civility, compared to the buffoons of
         | Silicon Valley.
        
           | gfourfour wrote:
           | There's a lot of cargo-cult mimicry of Steve Jobs and Elon
           | Musk that happens in terms of behavior.
           | 
           | But those guys were product people and to the extent that
           | their low-empathy personalities were beneficial it's in the
           | fact that they cared about creating things far more than
           | anything else, including other people or money. The phrase
           | "artistic temperament" long predates them for a reason.
           | 
           | But it's really absurd and counterproductive to try to mimic
           | that personality if what you're offering is anything other
           | than being the corporate version of an auteur, and if that's
           | what you were you wouldn't be mimicking anyone, and you
           | better produce some stunningly consistent results. Lots of
           | these guys think they're being uncompromising about "their
           | vision" when it's really just "their vision" of their spot on
           | the Forbes list.
           | 
           | New York is better in part, I would guess, because there's no
           | false premise that the investor is doing anything other than
           | acting as a conduit for capital. There's egos too but no one
           | is trying to live up to the standard of "changing the world"
           | or "innovating" or being "the next ___."
           | 
           | It probably also helps that Warren Buffet is the most
           | successful traditional investor of all time and a model of
           | good behavior.
        
           | Beijinger wrote:
           | With investors, it is probably the same situation with
           | employers.
           | 
           | A rejection does say nothing about you. The guy the hired
           | says a lot about the company.
        
         | klik99 wrote:
         | You can usually tell who these are by seeing if most of their
         | portfolio they aren't primary investor.
        
       | contingencies wrote:
       | <opine>Team is mostly BS. The chances that even a really good
       | investor, who is not actually in the game, can accurately
       | determine an early stage startup's commercial trajectory by
       | magically intuiting from highly condensed summaries of multiple
       | people's multiple decades of nuanced experience, is near zero.
       | Yes, there is insight to be had there, especially at the pointy
       | end of 80/20, but there are far more significant factors in most
       | cases. Long term VCs will tend to overstate the importance of
       | character due to survivor bias (ie. the successful follow-ons are
       | the only founders they really get to know).
       | 
       | IMHO most early stage investment is made based on hunches and
       | hand-waving after doing generalist macro assessments of
       | particular industries or trends. Frequently, faddish. GP's will
       | often do this, raise a fund around it, then associates are sent
       | out to get deal-flow and execute. Many startups will be get
       | selected from an available pool with the established investment
       | theme. This capital is largely sacrificial, and high miss rates
       | are expected.
       | 
       | Where things get serious at the personal level is in the mid to
       | later stages where you start to see bigger figures being moved
       | about and investors want a shepherd for their capital who has
       | proven stable and long haul capable - things like the capacity
       | not to suddenly live beyond their means, lose focus, drop it all
       | and go to Vegas, crash and burn at HR management, or break down
       | at the first signs of difficulty. That said, you also get
       | mechanics being added like tranched deployment and
       | fiscal/management oversight (eg. board seats) which are highly
       | effective at mitigating risk even in a low-trust scenario. Most
       | VCs are early stage and never play at this level.
       | 
       |  _To put it bluntly: early stage is mostly noise. Mid to later
       | stage, if they want the deal, they 'll make it happen._ It's your
       | job to be so damn good they can't help themselves.</opine>
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | > _by magically intuiting from highly condensed summaries of
         | multiple people 's multiple decades of nuanced experience, is
         | near zero_
         | 
         | One can't guess the successes. But you can eliminate the duds
         | who won't make it to a Series A.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-03 23:02 UTC)