The author makes the mistake of taking a single data point (a throwaway comment at that) and generalising from it. If you've got a board member or advisor (be

The author makes the mistake of taking a single data point (a throwaway comment at that) and generalising from it. If you've got a board member or advisor (be it from a VC or elsewhere) with strong experience, then it's crazy not to talk to them about the problems you're having. It's not just about product strategy, it's about building a company. If you've never had to scale a sales organization, if you've never had to open offices in foreign countries, etc. then it makes a huge amount of sense to speak to someone who's not only done it but has sat on half a dozen boards of companies who've had to go through the same set of problems you'll face. What you should however take away from the article that it's important to do due diligence on your investors. You want an investor whose advice you'd want even if they weren't invested in you (this applies both to the VC firm and to the VC partner you'll be dealing with). Why would anyone chose a top-tier VC over another VC - it's not because they offer the best terms of investments. It's because their value-add in terms of expertise, etc. is higher than everyone-else. There's no point in going after a top-tier VC if all you want is money.