4 ms·

Naval's always sounded a bit like a Facebook quote bot to me. He reiterates common knowledge in less concise ways than normally said while using the persona of

Naval's always sounded a bit like a Facebook quote bot to me. He reiterates common knowledge in less concise ways than normally said while using the persona of a monk. ...Actually, that can sum up a lot of Tech Twitter.

madmax108 8y ago
Honestly, I think that's true for a lot of VCs. They have to sound like they are smart and know the secrets of the industry so that entrepreneurs reach out to them (and many times on extremely skewed terms). But truth be told, a lot of VCs have been incredibly lucky with 1-2 bets they've made. Just a couple days ago was an article on front page of HN by Sam Altman about how to run a company, whereas he himself has had one failed startup. Softbank exists more or less because of a huuuuge bet on Alibaba which paid off. In the end, I doubt any of these "How to" articles hold up the test of perseverence. But survivor bias aside, it's still interesting to see how VCs think, and helps gain insight into their inner monologue.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  Not all VCs are created equal. We work for quite a few of them and the range of knowledge, connections, personalities, founder friendliness and ethics is quite broad. As a result of that there are VCs that you really don't want to have anything to do with and VCs that it is a pleasure to work with and that go to bat for the founders of the portfolio companies they've invested in with great regularity.
  - Mononokay 8y ago
    I don't have any particular experience with VCs, but personality-wise the guys at SUSA(Susa? Capitalisation is annoying when it comes to logo vs Twitter) and Homebrew are miles ahead of 99% of the others I've seen, so my first impression is to agree with you.
  - seehafer 8y ago
    I don’t have experience to say beyond seed stage, but at seed stage, especially given the explosion in funds, this is most definitely true. Even as a YC startup, VC interactions I’ve had have ranged from “I could give two shits about you” to “I’m a mensch even when I have to say no”. Founders remember who belongs in what camp and talk to each other about such things a lot.
  - madmax108 8y ago
    Interesting. I wonder, is there something like a Yelp/Glassdoor for VCs? A site where people can post about their experiences with VCs, how they were helpful (Like you mentioned, some VC may be great for retail tech while others for moonshot ventures), where they were unhelpful. How hands on or hands off the approach they took was, how much they look at investing as a culture of growth rather than a business (both are valid options IMHO) and so on. Would really help entrepreneurs make the right choice when it comes to approaching investors right. Of course, this can further boil up or down to investment firms rather than individual investors, based on seried of funding etc.
    - jacquesm 8y ago
      We do this informally for EU VCs, we have a pretty good idea which start-up will match which VC in our network but we have to be careful to maintain our independence so VCs do not start to feel we are pressuring them to make an investment or that we are seen as a 'stamp of approval'. ("we", me and the team of people that I work with). Because it is a very small world and we're not the (by far) the strongest party in it a negative advice is something I would not do unless there is public evidence that a VC can not be trusted or is unethical.
- irq11 8y ago
  A former coworker of mine said this years ago, and it stuck with me: ”Silicon valley is full of people who stepped in shit once, and are therefore now experts on horses.”
  - madmax108 8y ago
    Haha... this really needs to be framed somewhere
tomhoward 8y ago
I once heard PG say something like "It's crazy, but the YC startups that succeeded are the ones who followed our advice. The ones who failed, didn't". He's never claimed there's anything particularly brilliant about his advice. Indeed he's joked that his presence in office hours sessions could be replaced by a 3-line shell script. "Make something people want", "talk to your users", "spend less money than you make"... that's pretty much it. I think most of the really good VCs would be similarly modest about the value of their advice. The principles are really simple and easy to convey. The hard part is actually doing it.
- maxerickson 8y ago
  The interesting test is whether anyone can usefully predict "Make something people want". If no one is predicting that then the biggest thing YC is doing is making lots and lots of deals.
  - tomhoward 8y ago
    What YC tries to predict is whether the founders are capable of making something people want, not whether the product they pitch in the application process is already something people want. They are just looking for founders who can follow the build+release+test+repeat cycle as quickly and effectively as possible, and their claim is that if founders can do that really well in a large, valuable market, they will find success.
- Mononokay 8y ago
  At the same time, PG doesn't have this whole "I am righteous and the most intelligent guy around," sort of thing Naval has the impression he is.
  - tomhoward 8y ago
    People have accused PG of that. I don't see it in Naval. He's neither excessively/falsely modest, nor an egomaniac blowhard like plenty of others in that sphere. He just shares the concepts he thinks have been beneficial to himself and others in achieving success. His success speaks for itself, so it can't be dismissed as shallow.

madmax108 8y ago

Honestly, I think that's true for a lot of VCs. They have to sound like they are smart and know the secrets of the industry so that entrepreneurs reach out to them (and many times on extremely skewed terms). But truth be told, a lot of VCs have been incredibly lucky with 1-2 bets they've made. Just a couple days ago was an article on front page of HN by Sam Altman about how to run a company, whereas he himself has had one failed startup. Softbank exists more or less because of a huuuuge bet on Alibaba which paid off. In the end, I doubt any of these "How to" articles hold up the test of perseverence. But survivor bias aside, it's still interesting to see how VCs think, and helps gain insight into their inner monologue.

jacquesm 8y ago
Not all VCs are created equal. We work for quite a few of them and the range of knowledge, connections, personalities, founder friendliness and ethics is quite broad. As a result of that there are VCs that you really don't want to have anything to do with and VCs that it is a pleasure to work with and that go to bat for the founders of the portfolio companies they've invested in with great regularity.
- Mononokay 8y ago
  I don't have any particular experience with VCs, but personality-wise the guys at SUSA(Susa? Capitalisation is annoying when it comes to logo vs Twitter) and Homebrew are miles ahead of 99% of the others I've seen, so my first impression is to agree with you.
- seehafer 8y ago
  I don’t have experience to say beyond seed stage, but at seed stage, especially given the explosion in funds, this is most definitely true. Even as a YC startup, VC interactions I’ve had have ranged from “I could give two shits about you” to “I’m a mensch even when I have to say no”. Founders remember who belongs in what camp and talk to each other about such things a lot.
- madmax108 8y ago
  Interesting. I wonder, is there something like a Yelp/Glassdoor for VCs? A site where people can post about their experiences with VCs, how they were helpful (Like you mentioned, some VC may be great for retail tech while others for moonshot ventures), where they were unhelpful. How hands on or hands off the approach they took was, how much they look at investing as a culture of growth rather than a business (both are valid options IMHO) and so on. Would really help entrepreneurs make the right choice when it comes to approaching investors right. Of course, this can further boil up or down to investment firms rather than individual investors, based on seried of funding etc.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    We do this informally for EU VCs, we have a pretty good idea which start-up will match which VC in our network but we have to be careful to maintain our independence so VCs do not start to feel we are pressuring them to make an investment or that we are seen as a 'stamp of approval'. ("we", me and the team of people that I work with). Because it is a very small world and we're not the (by far) the strongest party in it a negative advice is something I would not do unless there is public evidence that a VC can not be trusted or is unethical.
irq11 8y ago
A former coworker of mine said this years ago, and it stuck with me: ”Silicon valley is full of people who stepped in shit once, and are therefore now experts on horses.”
- madmax108 8y ago
  Haha... this really needs to be framed somewhere

tomhoward 8y ago

I once heard PG say something like "It's crazy, but the YC startups that succeeded are the ones who followed our advice. The ones who failed, didn't". He's never claimed there's anything particularly brilliant about his advice. Indeed he's joked that his presence in office hours sessions could be replaced by a 3-line shell script. "Make something people want", "talk to your users", "spend less money than you make"... that's pretty much it. I think most of the really good VCs would be similarly modest about the value of their advice. The principles are really simple and easy to convey. The hard part is actually doing it.

maxerickson 8y ago
The interesting test is whether anyone can usefully predict "Make something people want". If no one is predicting that then the biggest thing YC is doing is making lots and lots of deals.
- tomhoward 8y ago
  What YC tries to predict is whether the founders are capable of making something people want, not whether the product they pitch in the application process is already something people want. They are just looking for founders who can follow the build+release+test+repeat cycle as quickly and effectively as possible, and their claim is that if founders can do that really well in a large, valuable market, they will find success.
Mononokay 8y ago
At the same time, PG doesn't have this whole "I am righteous and the most intelligent guy around," sort of thing Naval has the impression he is.
- tomhoward 8y ago
  People have accused PG of that. I don't see it in Naval. He's neither excessively/falsely modest, nor an egomaniac blowhard like plenty of others in that sphere. He just shares the concepts he thinks have been beneficial to himself and others in achieving success. His success speaks for itself, so it can't be dismissed as shallow.