3 ms·

Author has no concept of what it is like to take submissions to anything. As someone who is a member of an investment fund that gets way less attention than a t

by jblow 12y ago

Author has no concept of what it is like to take submissions to anything. As someone who is a member of an investment fund that gets way less attention than a top-tier VC, I'll tell you what it is like to have open submissions: Almost everything that comes through that channel is complete garbage. It has negative utility to read through that stuff because it makes you tired enough that you might actually miss something good if you see it anyway, and it predisposes you toward negativity regarding submissions (which is psychologically unhealthy both for your quality of life and your relationships with potential investees.) Our hit rate from open submissions was 0.25%, that is, it took 400 submissions to get one company in which we would invest. And that company is one that likely would have come to us through a more-closed submissions process. One of the most valuable things you can have as a business owner (startup or no) is an understanding of context. Know what the situation is like for the people you are dealing with. Know why they do things the way they do. This author has not built that experience/skill. He is only seeing things from his viewpoint as someone who wants money. Guess what, this makes him isomorphic to every other random startup founder in which a VC is not going to invest. Use common sense: VCs are financially motivated to find good companies to invest in! If they think something will give them an edge, they are going to try it. The fact that they don't take open submissions should tell you something about the dynamics of the system. You should listen and understand what that something is, because that understanding is valuable.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
boracay 12y ago
"Open submissions" doesn't, or at least have to, mean that you literally take any submission from anyone. It means things like having a larger group go a longer way in the submissions process and trying to stay away from arbitrary qualifications.
throwaway90446 12y ago
Great. Here is a hypothetical for you: we are a bootstrapped company with traction and earnings, but we're located in Armpit, KS and the only people we are networked with are our suppliers and our customers. We want to raise from a well connected firm like yourselves to launch our next phase of growth. How, exactly, do we do that without already being part of your referral network? In anticipation of your answer, "you'll find a way" is a pure blank-out. You've already closed your circuit. How do you expect the hypothetical "us" to break in?
- raminassemi 12y ago
  Here's one possible way: 1. Reach out to people who got funded by the VCs you want. 2. Ask them for a 10 minute phone call or if you can invite them for coffee. Do this with enough people and some WILL take the time. 3. Be awesome when talking to the founders (so they like you and believe you've got the stuff. 4. Ask for an intro. 5. Repeat 1 - 4 until you get an intro. Details: https://medium.com/@Steli/how-to-get-warm-introductions-to-vcs-a8fbe3affd01 https://medium.com/@Steli/how-to-get-warm-introductions-to-v...
  - ulfw 12y ago
    Just playing devil's advocate here. So you suggest people waste: - a lot of their own time researching say 25 random other companies, reach out to their founders (who are in a completely different field of business etc) - fly out to San Francisco from Armpit, KS. Waste 5 of those 25 founders time for coffee who actually agreed to meet with you even though you have nothing in common with them - then tell them that you're also not interested in them really. All you want is a backhanded intro to their investors, which they hope they will give you Only so that the investor will get 2-3 emails from founders who really know nothing about you other than what they found out in a 10 minute phone call or a rushed 30 min Starbucks on 2nd and Folsom. Shouldn't an associate (who actually gets paid for this job) do this, rather than waste founders who are busy building their own companies? Don't you think that system is broken?
    - raminassemi 12y ago
      "Just playing devil's advocate here." Not sure what you're getting out of that, but I'm happy to play along :-) "you suggest people waste: - a lot of their own time" I wouldn't call it "wasting time" if it gets you the result you want. "even though you have nothing in common with them" Being startup founders is already having a lot in common. "All you want is a backhanded intro" I wouldn't do any of this in a backhanded way, founders will smell it. Be transparent and upfront. "Only so that the investor will get 2-3 emails" The question was how to get warm introductions... these are warm introductions :) "from founders who really know nothing about you other than what they found out in a 10 minute phone call" ... or from follow up interactions you've had with them after that initial 10 minute phone call... "Don't you think that system is broken?" Nope :) I think it's an imperfect system - but then everything in the real world is.
dearvcs 12y ago
>Author has no concept of what it is like to take submissions to anything. 1. You're quite confident that you know me after reading one anonymous blog post. First, QQQ posts our real email and phone number on our website. I personally read/listen to every submission (1000+ in 2014) through this channel, and someone on our team (usually me) replies to every (non-troll) comment. We have also read and reviewed 100+ resumes attached to cold emails, along with 10+ cold investor email pitches. All three 'cold' channels have yielded amazing returns, including one of our best hires, a couple of our best investors, and many of our most loyal customers. As I've said before, the solution to warm introductions is not unlimited, irrelevant cold emails. But VCs should read and respond to all cold submissions that are clear, concise, and relevant. >Use common sense: VCs are financially motivated to find good companies to invest in! 2. Of course, VCs are financially motivated to find great companies. However, expecting that this fact will lead to optimal decision-making on their part assumes a perfectly efficient market. I'm arguing that the heuristics used by many investors are flawed. Early-stage funding, including at accelerators like YC, skews towards twentysomething founders. That's despite the fact that the average founder of a 'unicorn' startup is well over 30. Men get funded at higher rates than women. Tall men get funded at higher rates than short men. No one is arguing that any of these heuristics are correlated with increased returns. But they exist. >You should listen and understand what that something is, because that understanding is valuable. 3. This is not about me. QQQ is doing great. We could raise a Series A now, but I want to push for 4-6 months of additional growth before doing so. Also, this is my second startup as a founder, and I learned from my first that it was important to move QQQ to Silicon Valley and build a large network here. When I need to meet a VC these days, I always get 1+ warm introductions into the ideal partner. Many of the stories I tell on my blog are from my early startup days. Since then, I have learned how to "play the game." But I never forgot how much we struggled at the beginning, and want to share my experiences so that future founders will be able to spend more time building products that people love and less time learning to conform with artificial societal norms.

by jblow 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

boracay 12y ago

"Open submissions" doesn't, or at least have to, mean that you literally take any submission from anyone. It means things like having a larger group go a longer way in the submissions process and trying to stay away from arbitrary qualifications.

throwaway90446 12y ago

Great. Here is a hypothetical for you: we are a bootstrapped company with traction and earnings, but we're located in Armpit, KS and the only people we are networked with are our suppliers and our customers. We want to raise from a well connected firm like yourselves to launch our next phase of growth. How, exactly, do we do that without already being part of your referral network? In anticipation of your answer, "you'll find a way" is a pure blank-out. You've already closed your circuit. How do you expect the hypothetical "us" to break in?

raminassemi 12y ago
Here's one possible way: 1. Reach out to people who got funded by the VCs you want. 2. Ask them for a 10 minute phone call or if you can invite them for coffee. Do this with enough people and some WILL take the time. 3. Be awesome when talking to the founders (so they like you and believe you've got the stuff. 4. Ask for an intro. 5. Repeat 1 - 4 until you get an intro. Details: https://medium.com/@Steli/how-to-get-warm-introductions-to-vcs-a8fbe3affd01 https://medium.com/@Steli/how-to-get-warm-introductions-to-v...
- ulfw 12y ago
  Just playing devil's advocate here. So you suggest people waste: - a lot of their own time researching say 25 random other companies, reach out to their founders (who are in a completely different field of business etc) - fly out to San Francisco from Armpit, KS. Waste 5 of those 25 founders time for coffee who actually agreed to meet with you even though you have nothing in common with them - then tell them that you're also not interested in them really. All you want is a backhanded intro to their investors, which they hope they will give you Only so that the investor will get 2-3 emails from founders who really know nothing about you other than what they found out in a 10 minute phone call or a rushed 30 min Starbucks on 2nd and Folsom. Shouldn't an associate (who actually gets paid for this job) do this, rather than waste founders who are busy building their own companies? Don't you think that system is broken?
  - raminassemi 12y ago
    "Just playing devil's advocate here." Not sure what you're getting out of that, but I'm happy to play along :-) "you suggest people waste: - a lot of their own time" I wouldn't call it "wasting time" if it gets you the result you want. "even though you have nothing in common with them" Being startup founders is already having a lot in common. "All you want is a backhanded intro" I wouldn't do any of this in a backhanded way, founders will smell it. Be transparent and upfront. "Only so that the investor will get 2-3 emails" The question was how to get warm introductions... these are warm introductions :) "from founders who really know nothing about you other than what they found out in a 10 minute phone call" ... or from follow up interactions you've had with them after that initial 10 minute phone call... "Don't you think that system is broken?" Nope :) I think it's an imperfect system - but then everything in the real world is.

dearvcs 12y ago

>Author has no concept of what it is like to take submissions to anything. 1. You're quite confident that you know me after reading one anonymous blog post. First, QQQ posts our real email and phone number on our website. I personally read/listen to every submission (1000+ in 2014) through this channel, and someone on our team (usually me) replies to every (non-troll) comment. We have also read and reviewed 100+ resumes attached to cold emails, along with 10+ cold investor email pitches. All three 'cold' channels have yielded amazing returns, including one of our best hires, a couple of our best investors, and many of our most loyal customers. As I've said before, the solution to warm introductions is not unlimited, irrelevant cold emails. But VCs should read and respond to all cold submissions that are clear, concise, and relevant. >Use common sense: VCs are financially motivated to find good companies to invest in! 2. Of course, VCs are financially motivated to find great companies. However, expecting that this fact will lead to optimal decision-making on their part assumes a perfectly efficient market. I'm arguing that the heuristics used by many investors are flawed. Early-stage funding, including at accelerators like YC, skews towards twentysomething founders. That's despite the fact that the average founder of a 'unicorn' startup is well over 30. Men get funded at higher rates than women. Tall men get funded at higher rates than short men. No one is arguing that any of these heuristics are correlated with increased returns. But they exist. >You should listen and understand what that something is, because that understanding is valuable. 3. This is not about me. QQQ is doing great. We could raise a Series A now, but I want to push for 4-6 months of additional growth before doing so. Also, this is my second startup as a founder, and I learned from my first that it was important to move QQQ to Silicon Valley and build a large network here. When I need to meet a VC these days, I always get 1+ warm introductions into the ideal partner. Many of the stories I tell on my blog are from my early startup days. Since then, I have learned how to "play the game." But I never forgot how much we struggled at the beginning, and want to share my experiences so that future founders will be able to spend more time building products that people love and less time learning to conform with artificial societal norms.