Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

jacobbartlett.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 217 posts

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#81

Post by stilist »

behnamoh wrote: post #76
dheera wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-> went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) I'd edit this to -> white male went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) Source: I know lots of female and non-white Harvard grads who didn't get funded. I'm a non-white MIT grad and also found funding very, very difficult even when we had a product. We almost continuously had to spend >1/2 of our working hours just trying to get funding.…

I'm not white either but seriously, this mindset of "victimization of non-white people" needs to stop. I'd rather be taken seriously for my merits than my minority privileges (due to DEI for example).

You're looking at it backwards. White people get an automatic advantage because they're white. Any advantages given to minorities are an attempt to balance the game.

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#82

Post by dheera »

behnamoh wrote: post #76
dheera wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-> went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) I'd edit this to -> white male went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) Source: I know lots of female and non-white Harvard grads who didn't get funded. I'm a non-white MIT grad and also found funding very, very difficult even when we had a product. We almost continuously had to spend >1/2 of our working hours just trying to get funding.…

I'm not white either but seriously, this mindset of "victimization of non-white people" needs to stop. I'd rather be taken seriously for my merits than my minority privileges (due to DEI for example).

> I'd rather be taken seriously for my merits

Me too. The reality is that people don't always take my merits seriously.

I'm male though. Females have it much worse. I have heard lots of horror stories (both behind their back in "locker room talk" and directly from them) where their actual merits are effectively ignored and all focus is on their body. It's insane.

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#83

Post by llbeansandrice »

zomglings wrote: post #70
llbeansandrice wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any real benefit to taking ~$160k and 1% as a “founding” engineer? We’re not even close to series C yet but it’s starting to feel like I need to be more aggressive about compensation or a role change. If you don’t become a +$100mm company (and have the ability to cash out at that position) it seems to be a pretty rough deal honestly.

Depends - how much conviction do you have in the product you are building?

I think we’re building a great product. But 1% (undiluted) from an even $100mm company feels like a long shot.

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#84

Post by svnt »

dheera wrote: post #55
ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #4

Rubrik for early stage: 1. No product: -> went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) -> held director level at faang -> funded -> everyone else -> probably not funded 2. Have product: -> not prestigious -> need real ARR with good growth -> prestigious -> need a product -> everyone else -> not funded

-> went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) I'd edit this to -> white male went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) Source: I know lots of female and non-white Harvard grads who didn't get funded. I'm a non-white MIT grad and also found funding very, very difficult even when we had a product. We almost continuously had to spend >1/2 of our working hours just trying to get funding.…

It is possible it is racism but it is likely to be measurement error, sampling error, and/or specification error, assuming you have not ruled those out.

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#85

Post by pnw »

To be fair, none of those ideas seem like venture scale ideas to me. Maybe I'm missing something?

If you are talking to just one investor, you are doing it wrong. It's a parallel process, not serial. Kissing a lot of frogs serially looking for Prince Charming will slowly kill your morale, waste your time and investors quickly learn that others have passed on your deal.

Think of it more like drafting a football team. You want all the potential investors on the field at the same time. That's how deals close in weeks, not months.

If your investment round is taking so many months, something is wrong. This is why YC and Techstars do a demo day. Parallel pitches to a large audience of investors is the technique to close a round quickly.

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#86

Post by pnw »

yieldcrv wrote: post #72
ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #4

Rubrik for early stage: 1. No product: -> went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) -> held director level at faang -> funded -> everyone else -> probably not funded 2. Have product: -> not prestigious -> need real ARR with good growth -> prestigious -> need a product -> everyone else -> not funded

a lot of this is reputation laundering the outside capital is real, quickly landing a lead investor that gets the other investors to close comes from controlling the pools of capital your family’s donor advised fund and private foundation are the lead investors, or they are the only limited partners in the private equity fund thats functionally a family office this same capability allows for top university background…

I've never seen a donor advised fund or private foundation on a startup cap table, and I've seen quite a few. Got any examples?

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#87

Post by pnw »

threeseed wrote: post #65

Have actually read a few founders now who had no connections and just treated VCs as sales targets: 3000+ investor cold emails, 100+ meetings, 3 term sheets, 1 deal. Reading this it makes me wonder if this isn't the best strategy.

I know several successful founders who had to pitch over 100 firms on their financing round. I would say the usual number is probably 30 to 50, but 100 isn't out of the ordinary, especially if you are doing something unusual or new.

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#88

Post by VirusNewbie »

ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #4

Rubrik for early stage: 1. No product: -> went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) -> held director level at faang -> funded -> everyone else -> probably not funded 2. Have product: -> not prestigious -> need real ARR with good growth -> prestigious -> need a product -> everyone else -> not funded

This is super weird to me. In the tech circles I've run in, being from Harvard is about the same as being from UCLA or something.

I've never heard it considered a sign of exclusivity. CMU, Stanford, MIT, yes. But Harvard? It's not exactly known for a rigorous engineering program, and even less so the last fifteen years or so.

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#89

Post by behnamoh »

stilist wrote: post #81
behnamoh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not white either but seriously, this mindset of "victimization of non-white people" needs to stop. I'd rather be taken seriously for my merits than my minority privileges (due to DEI for example).

You're looking at it backwards. White people get an automatic advantage because they're white. Any advantages given to minorities are an attempt to balance the game.

> White people get an automatic advantage because they're white.

By whom? By other white people? Homophily is a real phenomenon in every ethnicity.

But if you're saying that white people get advantages by non-white people, then it's a cultural issue of those non-white people who, for some reason, have internalized racism (look up inferiority syndrome).

Re: “Yes” means “no”: The language of VCs

#90

Post by [deleted] »

ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #4

Rubrik for early stage: 1. No product: -> went to stanford or harvard -> funded (no questions asked) -> held director level at faang -> funded -> everyone else -> probably not funded 2. Have product: -> not prestigious -> need real ARR with good growth -> prestigious -> need a product -> everyone else -> not funded

[deleted]
Post reply on HN