Jeremy Brown

Taavet Hinrikus and I made the Financial Times Due Diligence email. https://lnkd.in/ez2AuGQx One 'unintended consequence' is that if there is a 45% tax on carry and CGT (raising £40m per year, remember) it for all intents and purposes closes the door on new VCs in the UK. Especially started by teams from non-traditional backgrounds. To meet the GP commit, you need to be already part of the 'wealthy' as you cannot rely on the value you create - nearly half of it will disappear - to fund it. We have both had extremely successful startups which are few and far between. The smaller number of new VCs will therefore more likely increasingly be for people who have inherited the capital or can draw it from their already rich family. Probably not want they have in mind with this policy.

32

2 Comments

I couldn’t be prouder to be a Venture Partner at Isomer Capital (aka the best European FoF - at least for me) as we just announced the launch of our pioneering £100m secondaries fund. This fund is dedicated to acquiring stakes from LPs in various VC funds, tapping into a massive and largely unexplored market. 🌟 Key Highlights: - Focused Investment: Primarily targeting stakes in VC funds, with selective investments in private companies. - Robust Funding: Already over 20% funded, thanks to strong support from Nordic family offices and a German foundation. - Market Potential: With a growing number of private tech companies and a VC liquidity crunch, Europe's VC secondaries market is poised for rapid growth. - Track Record: This isn’t Isomer’s first foray into the secondaries market. As a firm we’ve done several secondaries deals with portfolio companies and VC firms, including early-stage VC Seedcamp (in 2021) and mobility giant Bolt (in 2023). - Expert Team: Welcoming the amazing Omolade (Rachel) A., formerly of Coller Capital, as a principal to lead this initiative. 💡 Investment Strategy: - 65-75% of the fund will buy "LP interest" stakes in VC funds. - 15-25% will be directed towards stakes in companies. - Up to 15% reserved for flexible investment opportunities. 📈 Looking Ahead: We're targeting returns of 2-3x, with significant distributions expected in the next 4-7 years. As one of the few players in this space, we're not just participating in the market—we're driving it forward. Read all about it here: https://lnkd.in/dc7sbC3G #VentureCapital #SecondariesFund #EuropeanVC

23

1 Comment

VC world can be cruel and unforgiving. With LPs more and more pushing for distribution and liquidity, fund managers in the mid-tenure of their fund with zero DPI and TVPI around 1.0 would have much more difficulty to raise new fund. The ability to fundraise is one of the crucial indications and validation of the job for VCs. Key highlights from the article below: Thirteen percent of venture General Partners (GPs) no longer plan to raise another fund due to LP pullback. This rate has doubled since H1 2023 when only 6% of GPs had no plans for another fund. Nearly 44% of venture firms surveyed in mid-2023 had previously postponed their fundraising plans due to concerns about overexposure to the asset class. Many emerging managers entered venture capital in 2019 or 2020 when the LP market supported more funds. However, slow exits in the first half of 2024 have led to challenges in raising second funds without significant cash distributions to LPs. Some venture GPs are now actively participating in the secondaries market to demonstrate returns. Despite the challenges, GPs who secured fresh capital remain optimistic. They expect the 2023 and 2024 vintages to be the strongest return years since 2019. 🚀📈 #VC #VentureCapital #Fundraising #LPs #EmergingManagers #TechInvestment #MarketTrends #CountdownCapital #IndustryInsights #JetVentures #JetInvestment‍‍‍‍‍‍

23

Just landed in Denmark and now off to my first The Drop conference in Malmo, Sweden. First up in a few hours is an event I am co-organizing on distributed power and storage on the grid with 🟣 Chris Bernkopf of Podero with fellow cohosts Marcus Jacobsson of Sunshine Fund, Fredrik Rosenqvist of Qvantum International and Victor Nilsson of E.ON Sverige We will be organizing breakout sessions to discuss the following topics - The Heat Pump revolution: Fredrik Rosenqvist - Role of manufacturers, DER optimization from utilities vs. manufacturers, levers to drive heat pump adoption, challenges in installation capacity and expertise, heat pumps in single family homes and apartment complexes - VPPs and Utilities: Viktor Nilsson - Role of utilities, DER optimization from utilities vs. manufacturers, Virtual Power Plants (VPPs), the needs of consumers, giving users control over their energy, the challenge for utilities to transform into digital energy companies - DER Financing: Marcus Jacobsson - Key prerequisites for bankable projects (grid connect, permits, insurances, PPAs), latest financial engineering strategies to accelerate DER adoption, IRA vs European Green Deal - challenges and opportunities in the EU vs U.S. - Storage as the Holy Grail: Josh Felser - Role of battery storage on the grid, decentralized and non decentralized approaches, the role of utility and non-utility scale solutions, vehicle to grid, difference between EU and US in DERs and electricity markets - Energy Optimization: Chris Bernkopf - Decentralized energy flexibility and energy trading - different types of storage, how to use storage effectively, flexibility trading, local grid optimization, pathways to 100% green electricity If you just happen to be in Malmo at 15:00 today, come join us! Free coffee!

49

9 Comments

NOTWICS would like to alert founders to this lovely message I got from my good mate Tom Britton @ SyndicateRoom This excellent Cambridge based pre-seed and seed stage VC is looking for top founders and hopefully this is the first of many funds ringing the bell saying they are now deploying 💥 - akin to top man Dan Bowyer’s LP post yesterday. The winds of change are coming - funding is coming back From Tom “Hey Chris - We've partnered with Carbon13 to launch their next Climatech SEIS fund. The fund will open to investors on Tuesday and aims to deploy in the current tax year. And on Carbon 13 Carbon13 companies have gone on to raise up-rounds totalling more than £38m. The average age of their cohort participants is 37, a quarter hold PhDs and 63% of their teams are mixed gender”. Their portfolio now has 71 ventures across five key sectors: chemicals and materials, energy, food systems, enabling platforms and the built environment. Founders find out more here and get applying https://lnkd.in/es6EvuN5 Or Direct Message Tom for more Apologies for spelling mistakes - rushing to host a huge defence tech breakfast with FieldHouse Associates and others #startups #scaleups #vc #angel

9

Striking: Zenobē, a UK climate tech startup, raised £600m from KKR and £270m from Infracapital, bypassing VC entirely. Zenobe captures excess energy from wind farms to stabilize the grid and reduce gas power reliance. This means: Zenobe secured one of 2023's biggest startup fundraises — without any venture capital. #battery #fundraising #venturecapital #energystorage #infrastructure #growthinflection Sifted: https://lnkd.in/g8wF-xA5

5

TLDR: EIS should be scrapped as a fund structure but retained for Angel investments by individuals. Alex Chalmers has done all the work which in 10 years I've never got around to doing: why 95% of EIS/VCT funds are bad for our tech ecosystem, rip #startups off, and why as a Founder you should push back against their stupid fees or not take their money. https://lnkd.in/dnq9ZScS

35

7 Comments

"Simply put, there is too much capital seeking too few opportunities, particularly at the seed stage. Multi-stage firms have eliminated pricing discipline at seed stage and the proliferation of seed firms has made the task of investing at this stage as competitive as it’s ever been, leading me to believe that indexed seed investing in today’s environment will produce poor returns. What does this mean for today’s environment? It’s never been more important to break away from median performance. While there is risk in breaking away from the pack, the risk (at least performance wise) of staying part of the herd is simply far worse. Median returns for the recent vintages are simply terrible. One could argue that funds are still in their j-curve phases, but I suspect this doesn’t explain the divergence we’re seeing between GOOD performers and GREAT performers. More than ever before, it’s clear to me that playing the same game as everyone else will not work, so fund managers should question whether they are really capable of being in the top 5% of whatever strategy they are employing. From a LP perspective, allocators should likely ask the same of their managers and consider whether allocating to indexed mega funds or indexing across too broad of a portfolio of managers is tenable in achieving their return targets." https://lnkd.in/g8GqHY-P

5

Great interview with one of the best VCs out there. Lot's of good stuff in this article. One point worth highlighting on the eternal debate whether there is enough growth capital in Europe: great companies will always manage to raise money, no matter where they are based.

12

For anyone working in VC, I highly recommend taking a look at the Progress Map from Fifty Years. The map calculates a 'Competition Ratio' representing a market segment's relative level of saturation. This ratio is calculated by dividing a sector's TAM by the dollars invested in Series A startups from that sector over the last 10 years. In doing so, 50Y not only sheds light on the markets where there is outsized opportunity for disruption, but also the areas where outperformance is likely to be more challenged and the resulting impact on innovation & the economy comparatively small. Interestingly, what can be seen is that traditional software verticals like SaaS and CRM are among the most over concentrated markets, while industrial manufacturing segments like petrochem and paper are the most ripe for change. What's fascinating to me is that we as VCs are often focused on fostering growth within the same few areas. That's not to say that investing in software isn't critical. It certainly has streamlined how enterprises operate and changed how enterprises and customers interact. It also provides a certain scalability to VCs that make it attractive from a potential returns perspective. On the flip side, hard technologies and manufacturing processes are extremely hard to build, have much longer timelines to achieve revenue traction, and face stiff competition from legacy incumbents. But this makes me think that perhaps these areas are the most worth venturing into if progress is our ultimate objective. We are fortunate at Harpoon to be partners with companies like Solugen that are proving this day in and day out. They have fundamentally revolutionized the chemicals industry by proving that a traditionally carbon intensive industry can be decarbonized in a price competitive way. I hope we continue to see change and investment in every industry, but I think VCs should also not shy away from the challenge of investing in those technologies where rapid revenue expansion is not immediate.

91

15 Comments

💡 Why Investing in ClimateTech Now Makes Sense for LPs! 🌍 During SuperReturn more VCs than ever had been fundraising for their next funds. Potential LPs need to identify the most promising tech vertical. What are the benefits of climate tech compared to others? 1️⃣ Impactful Returns: ClimateTech offers substantial ROI potential while contributing to global sustainability goals. According to Dealroom.co the climate tech ecosystem has increased its combined value by 45x in a decade. 2️⃣ Net Zero Imperative: According to Boston Consulting Group (BCG) up to 31% of the German climate goals cannot be achieved if we do “business as usual”. We need innovative technology & startups to accelerate energy transition. According to Allianz over 75% of emissions reductions must come from emerging technologies. 3️⃣ Critical Funding Gap: Total investments to date are $10T. Sounds to a lot, but to reach Net-Zero we need to reach $215T. 🚀 Seizing the Opportunity Since 2016, Future Energy Ventures has been at the forefront of Climate Tech innovation. LPs of our Fund II include major players like E.ON and the European Investment Fund (EIF) or Energie AG OÖ or CLP. We are supporting those climate tech startups which will be the major digital players in a decarbonized future. #ClimateTech #Sustainability #FutureEnergy #NetZero

9

Fusion has critics. There’s lots to debate, but it is far from “scientific bull sh*t” and “deeply intellectually dishonest”, as argued by Chamath Palihapitiya on the All-In Podcast. Strong opinion. Not a lot of substance. Here’s why: His argument: ☀️ Solar + storage will be available at $30/MWh so we don’t need fusion. 💻 Fusion is different from other large technical innovations (like the computer) because those technologies had no alternatives. 💰 Capital is being diverted to fusion that could be better spent on furthering American interests and energy independence. The truth: ☀️ Solar is amazing and we should build a lot of it where we can. But, #solar can't be deployed everywhere. Many places have a poor solar resource or can’t use solar period due to land constraints. Plus, we don’t have the capacity to store solar economically at scale over long periods of time (known as seasonal storage). The assertion that the world (or even the USA) has superabundant, low-cost solar + storage is untrue. 💻 He makes the argument that we won’t run down the cost curve with fusion because fusion already exists in the form of solar PV. This is equivalent to saying: don’t develop computers because we can do calculations by hand. Solar is orders of magnitude less efficient than what fusion could be - same as how calculating everything by hand was orders of magnitude less efficient than what computers could be. 💻 The point missed is that fusion is not a modest improvement over energy today. It can (1) be 7,000,000x more efficient than fossil fuels, (2) safely operate all day everyday, and importantly (3) be deployed ANYWHERE in the world. This energy product doesn’t exist and is 100% a technological improvement equivalent to computers, automotives, or what SpaceX has done for launch. 💰 There’s a healthy debate to be had on how to spend limited capital on the energy transition. However, the US invested ~$500B in #energy in 2023 (ref. IEA). We invested roughly $1.4B in fusion in 2023. Investing 0.28% of "energy capital" in high-potential innovation like fusion is wildly low. A healthy investment ecosystem should be 5x - 10x that. 💰 Finally, the idea that #fusion is not essential to energy #independence is short sighted. The US already lost renewables to China. Developing countries looking to secure their long-term energy supply will be faced with a choice: dependence on US gas, or independence with Chinese renewable technology. Seceding fusion to our largest economic rival waives the US interest in remaining the energy superpower of the world. Fusion will be the last energy technology we ever need. We can invest in that future, or let others take the lead. Take a listen: https://lnkd.in/gfRACmQE #DeepTech #Investing

73

4 Comments

Claudia - loved your YouTube post below. I wrote (but did not publish) a piece about what “Private Equity (PE) Doesn’t Understand About Venture Capital (VC).” Here it is: Though both Private Equity (PE) and Venture Capital (VC) are rooted in investing, they operate in starkly different ecosystems. PE, traditionally known for buying mature, stable companies and driving efficiencies, often misses the nuances of VC’s high-stakes world of funding nascent, innovative startups. The misalignment largely stems from differences in risk tolerance, time horizons, and value creation approaches. A primary misconception PE firms may have is underestimating the unpredictability and iterative nature of early-stage investing. PE deals generally involve extensive due diligence, steady cash flow analysis, and predictable returns over a five-to-seven-year horizon. In contrast, VCs embrace uncertainty, often betting on emerging technologies or revolutionary business models that may take over a decade to scale. As Sequoia’s Roelof Botha once remarked, “Early-stage VC is about being comfortable with being uncomfortable.” This willingness to navigate ambiguity is something PE investors might struggle with. For example, when Facebook was initially gaining traction, PE firms might have found it an unconvincing prospect. With no stable cash flow and little data to forecast future growth, PE firms would likely dismiss it as an unproven risk. VC, on the other hand, saw the potential in Facebook’s ability to capture user attention, scale its network, and, eventually, monetize through ads. They invested not because Facebook was a safe bet but because it presented a high-upside opportunity—a hallmark of VC thinking that often contrasts with PE’s conservatism. Another key difference is the approach to value creation. PE firms are accustomed to cutting costs, optimizing processes, and restructuring debt, aiming for immediate profitability. VCs, however, focus on growth and customer acquisition, often encouraging startups to “burn cash” to capture market share quickly. This “growth over profit” mentality may seem reckless to a PE investor, yet it’s fundamental to VC. Uber, for instance, operated at a loss for years, prioritizing market expansion over profitability—a strategy that might baffle PE professionals accustomed to financial stability. PE’s approach can clash with the cultural dynamics of startups. Startups thrive on flexibility, and fast decision-making—qualities that rigid corporate structures can stifle. PE’s operational playbook might include board meetings, quarterly targets, and management oversight that, while effective in mature businesses, can hinder a startup’s speed. In short, while PE and VC both drive business growth, PE’s structured, low-risk approach diverges sharply from VC’s high-risk, high-reward ethos. Understanding and respecting these differences can lead to more harmonious collaboration between these two distinct but interconnected sectors.

35

3 Comments

Stop this removal-only obsession in the carbon markets. What kind of hare-brained approach is that? We need avoidance even more than we need removals. This article reminds me of the analogy I made a few months ago about a sinking boat. No amount of bailing water with buckets will save you if the hole in the hull is getting bigger. Remember, if deforestation was a country, it would be the world's third largest emitter. And no, you cannot just demand/legislate that poor rural people stop deforesting without providing alternative income. That is why forest carbon exists. It takes some form of totalitarian mindset (and/or total lack of understanding of rural economies)to think one can just ban things they do not like. https://lnkd.in/eCddBRwt

49

5 Comments

The next 3-5 years in venture capital will be a Hunger Games-style showdown between the mega funds and emerging managers. The rich get richer, and the rest get crushed. The biggest funds will hoard capital, scoop up the best deals, and keep the gates locked. VC is evolving into an oligopoly where a few behemoths control the game. The rest? They fight for scraps or die quietly. For LPs, it means one thing: if you’re not in with the biggest players, you’re out. Top-tier VCs get the money, deals, and returns, while newer, smaller players are left behind. This means fewer exits, more stagnation, and less excitement. The romantic vision of venture capital—backing scrappy founders in a garage—is being replaced by institutional checks and thinking. Risk aversion is at an all-time high, and innovation is dictated by the big dogs, not driven from the bottom up. But the role of emerging managers isn’t dead—it’s just getting harder. While the big guys stick to safe bets, as emerging managers we dig into niches, find overlooked founders, and chase moonshots. We must be creative, flexible, and aggressive because we play without a safety net. That hunger often leads to spotting opportunities the mega funds miss, keeping the spirit of venture alive. Downturns? They’re a crucible for us as emerging managers. With valuations down and competition clearing out, we can shine. Historically, some of today’s most iconic venture firms were forged in the fires of a downturn because they had the guts to invest when others didn’t. For LPs, it’s about guts too. Sure, follow the herd into the largest players, but if you want asymmetric returns, emerging managers have the upside. You just have to take the risk. The future of venture is a two-speed game. On one side, mega funds—stable, rich, and playing it safe. On the other, emerging managers—scrappy, driven, taking risks that move the needle. The smartest LPs will do both: park capital with the big dogs for steady returns and also back emerging managers with fresh perspectives. Because if VC turns into a sanitized, predictable machine run by a few firms, we all lose. Innovation dies, entrepreneurship becomes a monopoly, and venture’s whole purpose evaporates. The dream of democratizing innovation is under threat, but it doesn’t have to die. Venture’s future depends on supporting both mega funds and bold emerging managers still willing to take risks. We all need to keep pushing boundaries and reminding ourselves why venture capital was exciting in the first place. It always takes a village. Together, we rise!

38

3 Comments

🌟 Interesting yet unsurprising findings from the latest VC performance report: 📈 Established European venture capital funds (fund 5+) are delivering 2x the IRR of New (fund 1-2) and Developing (3-4) funds. 🌍 European VC funds consistently outperform their US counterparts, underscoring Europe's strength in the global investment landscape. Read the article at sifted https://lnkd.in/eZYF4THT

36

9 Comments

ANNOUNCEMENT- I’m delighted to share that Asset Class has partnered with Palantir Technologies to bring AI to the Alternatives and Private Capital Markets. At Asset Class we will integrate the AIP platform and Foundry capabilities of Palantir with our Fund Operating System (Fund OS). We will work with the AIP Platform and Palantir's Foundry Ontology to support highly complex tasks / co-pilot features that will allow us to leverage the FULL dataset that comes with the Asset Class Platform. By linking EVERY step of the Investor and Fund journey on a SINGLE platform, we have a uniquely complete dataset that can inform our AI actions. Over time we will integrate this as part of our Asset Class Network. This will continue to ensure Asset Class is a far more powerful system than any other in the market. We are a platform - not just an app. In the near future, we will be an AI Enabled, Networked Platform I cannot wait to bring the power of AI to our platform to enable our clients to super-charge their investment in our platform. See the announcement here: https://lnkd.in/eCSy5Tnu

47

4 Comments

"Funding Collapse sends investment in start-ups to six year low" The Times today covering the shocking stats that VenturePath uncovered, with our partner Beauhurst. Great quotes from supporters Michael Moore CEO, BVCA and Julian David CEO, techUK. * UK VC funding at Series A is -44% from last year, and worsening * Q3 24 is down a staggering 57% from Q2, itself down from Q1 * 9 in 10 seed funded startups cannot access Series A VC funding, the next 'rung on the funding ladder' * Just 32 future scaleup companies across the whole of the UK were able to access their first VC funding round in Q3...a 6 year low * Half a billion less capital is going in to UK scaleups at Series A, than just 2 years ago! As the UK scaleup funding gap widens, we are losing ground against other countries, at both startup stage (a position the UK worked hard to achieve, since 2011), and for scaleup support. OECD data: 13th in the world for scaleup support, and that's before Series A funding access dried up. I get that its confusing. Another report (BBB, Nations & Regions) released this week spoke of positive trends in private investment, stating "The data for Q2 2024 shows that investment value has continued to grow". Great, I love to see optimistic data. But under analysis that bundles venture with private equity (later stage), where a few megadeals skew the numbers. Otherwise the exact opposite is true. Our independent research here, for the UK ScaleUp Investment Mission, is laser beam focussed on Series A. The funding round where companies move from the c.1m startups launched each year, through the 2,179 that access seed funding, into the rarefied category of being recognised as future scaleups, attracting Series A funding (£2-10m). The UK venture landscape is currently funding just 248 pa of these companies, and declining. We've been sharing this urgent call for support with the new Government since the day after the election. I've personally met with several Ministers, and spoke to all the relevant Government departments. I will shamelessly repeat loudly what is at stake. UK scaleup funding at Series A has nearly halved in a year, and continues to decline steeply, more than halving in the last quarter. VenturePath developed The UK ScaleUp Investment Mission to convene the scaleup support ecosystem and £7bn of funders to help address this problem, to improve nationwide access to VC investment, and create more venture-backed successes. We have clear support, clear recommendations to reverse this decline in UK scaleup investment, and have made a clear ask of Government for participation in this, to ensure immediate action is taken to create the conditions for success for UK scaleups, ensuring the focus on growth isn't undermined by lack of capital, or equitable access to it. Government decision makers, we'd love your interest, to progress to action. HM Treasury: Rt Hon Rachel Reeves Spencer Livermore James Murray & CC Poppy Gustafsson (welcome to the debate).

739

192 Comments