3 ms·

I tried to get interest in Silicon Valley for my project. I'm in NYS US. I tried a lot of advice on how to contact VCs. All my efforts were a huge waste of t

by graycat 10y ago

I tried to get interest in Silicon Valley for my project. I'm in NYS US. I tried a lot of advice on how to contact VCs. All my efforts were a huge waste of time. So, I got a lot of advice, about introductions, how to write a pitch deck, and more. As far as I can tell, all of that advice was nonsense and, for me, a big waste of time. Sure, I could get an introduction from one of my Ph.D. dissertation advisers, past president of one of the world's best research universities with one of the most famous computer science departments. But I doubt that many or any VCs know this guy personally and in that case I would have insulted my former dissertation adviser, the VC, and myself -- no thanks. Once I did get a warm introduction from the CIO of one of the world's most famous companies, very successful, and famous for a lot of use of technology. As far as I could tell, the warm introduction was, for the VC, just a throwaway. A waste for the CIO, the VC, and me. Bummer. Really, an introduction is the VC having others do part of the VCs work, and this should not be justified: E.g., some of the standard advice is to write a very short, general pitch deck, with only a few foils and only a few words per foil, with the only purpose being to get the VC interested enough to ask for more information. Well, if this is the purpose of the first contact, no way should I bother the president of a high end university or the CIO of a top company; instead, the VC can just glance at a few foils and words in a PDF file, type "Sounds good. I'm interested. Please send more." and hit Reply. To be more clear on what VCs are not responding to, my project is to get the world's best solution, much better than anything else, for a problem that is pressing for nearly all users of the Internet, in the US and around the world. So, some back of the envelope arithmetic is 5 ads per Web page 10 pages per usage $2 per 1000 ads displayed 2 * 10**9 usages per week 52 weeks a year 5 * 10 * 2 * 2 * 10**9 * 52 / 1000 = 10,400,000,000 dollars of revenue per year. Status: Production quality software -- from carefully designed, highly scalable software and server farm architecture -- written and running with no known problems, currently in alpha test. All that information above has been essentially ignored by essentially every well known VC firm in Silicon Valley. So, if that doesn't work, what does? Well, about all that is left is what is still promising but nearly never in the advice. So, here is what is left: Go ahead with the business. Go live. Get publicity, users, and revenue. Have significant traction growing rapidly. Wait for the VCs to contact you. Of course, I'm a solo founder, CEO, CTO, CIO, Software VP, all of the development team, Server Farm and Network VP, ..., janitor. So, by the time my company has traction significant and growing rapidly, if the project will work at all, then soon it should have plenty of revenue for rapid growth. If the growth happens, then there will be plenty of after tax earnings to make me financially successful. That is, the cost for me to run the server farm will fall quicly to less than 1% of revenue with 99+% of the revenue pre-tax earnings. One server from less than $1000 in parts should have the capacity to generate $200,000+ a month in revenue. For a solo founder, why then take equity funding? By the way, it's all safe for work, legal, ethical, squeaky clean, etc. Still, essentially no one on Sand Hill Road gives a sh_t. Okay: They have their ways of making money, and I have mine. Apparently we have nothing in common. Lesson: I no longer place much value on advice for how to contact VCs. Or, if they are at all interested, then they will contact you. If there is a mob of them on the front lawn waving stacks of $1000 dollar bills at you and screaming for you to take the money, then maybe open the door and otherwise call the police to have them run out of the neighborhood! That is, if you are a solo founder, then by the time they want you, you won't want them. So, what ARE the VCs looking for? How about young, naive founders, traction significant and growing rapidly, no earnings, five founders, all credit cards maxed out, each founder with a pregnant wife, and eager to sign any term sheet.

tyre 10y ago
If you don't have users, you don't have a company. My guess is, that's why they are rejecting you. Or your $10bn/year metric is non-sense. I see 0 ads per session because I use an ad blocker. What exactly is the pressing problem you're solving?
- graycat 10y ago
  > If you don't have users, you don't have a company. Right. But it's tough to find any such statement on the Web site of a seed or series A VC. If they want me to have users, then they want me to have revenue. For that I need to get my first server built, running, and live on the Internet. And once I have that, I can just get the publicity and mostly otherwise see if people like the site without any equity funding. If the users do like the site and the usage grows, by the time that first server is fully busy, I will have ballpark $200,000 a month in revenue with less than 1% of that as expenses and 99+% of it as pre-tax earnings. Then since I'm a solo founder and 100% owner, why should I consider equity funding? Or, by the time they want to write me a check, I won't need it. > Or your $10bn/year metric is non-sense. Not at all. Planning is important, and that's how the planning works out. Sure, there is the assumption that people like the site. But the site itself is not much of a question since the software is essentially ready for quite serious production. If the VCs want to wait until the $10 billion is much easier to see, fine for them. Then they can offer to write me a series A check for $5 million for 1/3rd of my company? Gee, thanks, guys, your $5 million is about 5 hours of my revenue, nearly all of which is pre-tax earnings. > I see 0 ads per session because I use an ad blocker. If that gets to be a problem, then I will send the ads from my server and not have my Web pages get the ads from ad servers; besides part of my work is some unique and especially effective ad targeting where it will be easier for me just to send the ads from my server farm; ad blockers will, then, have to tell the difference between Web page images that are ads and ones that are content, both coming from the same domain name. Lot's of luck, there, guys! > What exactly is the pressing problem you're solving? I told the VCs. None of them gave a sh_t. My intention here is not to pitch VCs. Instead, I'm just trying to give other entrepreneurs the benefit of the painful, wasteful lessons I learned: In shortest terms, just pick a project you can do from your own checkbook, build that business, wait for the VCs to call you, and, then, see if you are still willing to accept their check. Likely you won't be.

by graycat 10y ago

tyre 10y ago

If you don't have users, you don't have a company. My guess is, that's why they are rejecting you. Or your $10bn/year metric is non-sense. I see 0 ads per session because I use an ad blocker. What exactly is the pressing problem you're solving?

graycat 10y ago
> If you don't have users, you don't have a company. Right. But it's tough to find any such statement on the Web site of a seed or series A VC. If they want me to have users, then they want me to have revenue. For that I need to get my first server built, running, and live on the Internet. And once I have that, I can just get the publicity and mostly otherwise see if people like the site without any equity funding. If the users do like the site and the usage grows, by the time that first server is fully busy, I will have ballpark $200,000 a month in revenue with less than 1% of that as expenses and 99+% of it as pre-tax earnings. Then since I'm a solo founder and 100% owner, why should I consider equity funding? Or, by the time they want to write me a check, I won't need it. > Or your $10bn/year metric is non-sense. Not at all. Planning is important, and that's how the planning works out. Sure, there is the assumption that people like the site. But the site itself is not much of a question since the software is essentially ready for quite serious production. If the VCs want to wait until the $10 billion is much easier to see, fine for them. Then they can offer to write me a series A check for $5 million for 1/3rd of my company? Gee, thanks, guys, your $5 million is about 5 hours of my revenue, nearly all of which is pre-tax earnings. > I see 0 ads per session because I use an ad blocker. If that gets to be a problem, then I will send the ads from my server and not have my Web pages get the ads from ad servers; besides part of my work is some unique and especially effective ad targeting where it will be easier for me just to send the ads from my server farm; ad blockers will, then, have to tell the difference between Web page images that are ads and ones that are content, both coming from the same domain name. Lot's of luck, there, guys! > What exactly is the pressing problem you're solving? I told the VCs. None of them gave a sh_t. My intention here is not to pitch VCs. Instead, I'm just trying to give other entrepreneurs the benefit of the painful, wasteful lessons I learned: In shortest terms, just pick a project you can do from your own checkbook, build that business, wait for the VCs to call you, and, then, see if you are still willing to accept their check. Likely you won't be.