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

How Justin Kan fundraises

blog.atrium.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 63 posts

Re: How Justin Kan fundraises

#21

Post by lisabethhan »

scotthtaylor wrote: post #19
lisabethhan wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey Jacques, you're absolutely right given Justin's background. We started Atrium Academy to help democratize the fundraising process for founders (ie. speaking with first time founders who just raised their Series A, reviewing pitch decks and narratives with mentors, being matched with recommended investors based on industry and expertise)

So you're introducers, taking a 5% fee?

Hey Scott,

Atrium Academy doesn't take any fees, or charge any money. Our mission is to help founders by offering free, educational workshops for the startup community.

Check it out here: atrium.co/academy

Re: How Justin Kan fundraises

#22

Post by sisun1030 »

jacquesm wrote: post #12
lisabethhan wrote: post #11

Hey, I'm Lisa @ Atrium - here to answer any questions. I run our fundraising bootcamp Atrium Academy w/Justin to help founders meet the right investors and raise a great Series A. Check it out/Apply here for our next one in March: www.atrium.co/academy

Maybe it would be good to apply some 'star power' discounts here and there, what works for Justin most likely will not work in the same way or even at all for others. Justin has the pick of the litter when it comes to raising funding and some of the advice given really does not translate to 'the real world' of founders doing their first raise.

I'm one of the founders (82 Labs, Inc.) who attended the Academy. Met top tier VC partners (all decision makers in their funds) on the spot, pitched, got great feedback, and found the process extremely efficient. One of them gave us term sheets for Series A few weeks (and more meetings) later :) Highly recommend.

Re: How Justin Kan fundraises

#25

Post by keithwhor »

lpolovets wrote: post #16
sethbannon wrote: post #10

Dangerous advice. From the article: "if a VC sends a follow-up email asking factual questions, they’re already emotionally uninterested. Many entrepreneurs get caught up in this process: they send the VC a fact and citation, which the VC nitpicks, etc., but it’s already too late. The entrepreneur has failed by not creating the type of confidence necessary to de-risk the investment." If you want investors that actuall…

As an investor, I agree with you and disagree with the article. I dig in with factual questions because I'm excited, not because I'm not. If I'm not interested, that's when I pass instead of asking questions. FWIW the real truth is somewhere in the middle: some investors invest based on their gut, and if they are asking factual questions then that means they are not emotionally interested enough. Other investors inve…

Hey Leo,

There's probably no objective truth, but let me offer a perspective: a founder sees 1 founder (themselves) and 100 VCs and a VC sees 100 founders and 1 VC. In the same way you look for patterns in founders, teams, products and markets to determine who to invest in, founders look for patterns in VCs to see who's likely to invest. A useful and common pattern founders pick up on is VC tire kicking: the ones who are interested enough to dig in but not excited enough to invest immediately. Asking questions in a meeting is one thing, but following up in an e-mail with an itemized list of; "how do you think about [x], what about [y] competitor, have you thought about [z]" is a surefire indicator that an investor's not willing to move right now (not enough confidence in founder, team, product or market) and, as a founder, you need to move on.

So you may sit here and proclaim, "hey, this advice isn't accurate, because I ask questions when I'm interested!" Well... yeah, sure. There's (1) selection bias involved, you're a well-known VC and you're likely meeting with, on average, more experienced founders (by the time a first-time founder gets to you they may have been through an accelerator, faced tens of rejections or more, etc.) and this can lead to more mature relationship building, and (2) for every 1 in 100 founders you invest in this way, you passed on the other 99, making you one of their 99 they need to pattern match and learn from.

Viewed through this lens, founders should absolutely take this advice to heart. If you, as an investor, really wanted to invest in a founder and they snubbed you a bit after a follow up question (not rudely, they just have to choose where to focus), would you suddenly lose interest, or would you pursue a great deal / great opportunity? I have a hard time believing you'd let somebody you thought was the next Zuck walk out of the room without a term sheet. Founders should try to find the investor who thinks they're the next "Zuck", or some reasonable facsimile of such given the product and market.

Hope that helps clarify. I've seen friends put through the ringer by getting too caught up in the weeds with VCs that clearly weren't interested, or were tire-kicking. Can happen to amazing founders and it's wildly distracting.

Re: How Justin Kan fundraises

#29

Post by kayhi »

jacquesm wrote: post #9
birken wrote: post #8

Story time: In early 2012, the startup I was working for, Thumbtack, had struggled for 6-8 months to raise a Series A but finally got to the finish line. Around the same time, Justin Kan co-founded a company called Exec, and within a few months raised a "party round" that was nearly as much as our Series A, with a valuation twice as high. Our company was years old and had serious traction, Kan's company had done esse…

Exactly. It's FOMO rather than anything tangible, which can work quite well as long as you don't mess up completely. Anybody remember color.com? https://www.fastcompany.com/3002341/color-failed-what-happen... I don't think Bill Nguyen would be able to repeat that sort of raise.

It’s funny in life that a person who may not be able to that type raise again doesn’t need to do one (ie. has enough money to never work again)

Re: How Justin Kan fundraises

#30

Post by jacquesm »

kayhi wrote: post #29
jacquesm wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. It's FOMO rather than anything tangible, which can work quite well as long as you don't mess up completely. Anybody remember color.com? https://www.fastcompany.com/3002341/color-failed-what-happen... I don't think Bill Nguyen would be able to repeat that sort of raise.

It’s funny in life that a person who may not be able to that type raise again doesn’t need to do one (ie. has enough money to never work again)

He already had achieved that when he did the 'Color' thing. I think plenty of these serial entrepreneurs raise money for the PR and validation reasons, not because they actually needed the money to begin with.
Post reply on HN