4 ms·
Without knowing how one ranks, though, it's substantially harder to prioritize. This doesn't hurt the big funds so much as it does the small ones. If I were a
by DelaneyM 10y ago
Without knowing how one ranks, though, it's substantially harder to prioritize.
This doesn't hurt the big funds so much as it does the small ones. If I were an eCommerce or Logistics company, for example, there are a subset of niche funds which would be great strategic investors; but knowing they're only going to invest in one or two ventures would leave me disinclined to prioritize them when high-frequency investors are in the mix.
I don't want to kvetch here, it's a much better system than the current free-for-all. But since investors already get the first-mover advantage, it would be nice if entrepreneurs had more complete information.
To carry the theme of relationship analogues in this thread: knowing who's interested in me is great, but I'd rather be someone's dream girl than a fallback or fling.
- Finbarr 10y agoWe do have a lot of context on investors that can help founders when choosing who to meet with. In addition, we're going to let investors specify a reason why they want to meet with each company (optionally). This should give less well known investors who are highly suited to particular companies a chance to get noticed.
- DelaneyM 10y ago> we're going to let investors specify a reason why they want to meet with each company (optionally). Even better! You guys have really thought this through. :)
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]