Mike Rosengarten

Exciting News: Schematic is publicly available and we’ve raised $4.8M in seed funding! 🚀 I’m pumped to share that Schematic is now publicly available! We've also raised $4.8M in seed funding, led by MHS Capital with participation from NextView Ventures, Active Capital, Atlanta Ventures, and Ritual Capital—along with support from incredible founders of companies like CrowdStrike, LaunchDarkly, and Salesloft. A big thank you to our investors for believing in us, to our customers for guiding us, and to Benjamin Papillon, Jasdeep Garcha, Giovanni Hobbins, Vladyslav Len, Youssef Salah, Christopher Brady, Joseph Chrzan, Mohammed Almusaddar, and Markiian Simkiv for the opportunity to build this together. ➡️ Solving the last mile of pricing & packaging At every startup, one thing is certain: pricing and packaging will always change. Product and engineering teams shouldn’t have to reinvent the wheel every time this happens. Most companies hard-code pricing and packaging into their applications, making it slow and painful to evolve as market demands shift. ➡️ What We’re Building We're building Schematic to transform pricing and packaging for B2B SaaS companies by getting product and engineering teams out of billing projects. With Schematic, B2B SaaS companies can change pricing & packaging without code changes or billing refactors. ➡️ How It Works With just a few lines of code, businesses can implement pricing and packaging into any application—end-to-end—from feature delivery through billing and customer experience. Quickly roll out new features and tie them to your pricing plans. Target specific plans to customers and adjust them without engineering support. Experiment, scale, and manage pricing & packaging operations: trials, plans, limits, entitlements, metering usage, handling exceptions, provisioning customers, & embedding front-end purchasing components —all without code changes. ➡️ Who we’re building for We’re building Schematic for B2B SaaS companies who want their pricing & packaging roadmaps to move in sync with their product roadmaps, without slowing down their engineering teams. Some key use cases our customers are already benefiting from: 🔹Outsourcing homegrown & hard-coded entitlement services. 🔹Programmatically managing feature access based on subscription plans. 🔹Metering usage and actually enforcing limits. 🔹Updating and managing plans, add-ons, bundling, and customer exceptions 🔹Delivering embeddable purchasing experiences (pricing tables, customer portals, upgrade/downgrade flows, etc). We’re still in the early innings, but the foundation is strong—we're already handling 500K entitlement flag evaluations every month. If you’re a founder or a product leader looking to avoid building what should be out-of-the-box (feature flags, entitlements, admin dashboards, customer portals), check out Schematic and let us know what you think.

183

84 Comments

I just went through 244 websites from the latest YC batch and as a designer, I’m going to pick out my favorites The first is Actionbase (YC S24) I like this one because it has an intriguing headline. So many of these companies are just stating what they do. Or at worst, state what they do and do something cringey like “AI automation at the speed of thought”. Don't do that!! You have to understand your customers, what their motivations are —  as a developer, I’m at least intrigued about using this product The second is Unriddle (YC S24) Super clean. Great black/white theme which I associate with writing papers. I think the headline is strong and action-oriented. The third is expand.ai (YC S24) This isn’t a super exciting page, but it doesn’t have to be. It tells me who I am as a customer — and importantly — shows me a demo! If you can show off how your product works without a 30s video. Go for it. Time-to-value there is everything. Next, is Mito Health (YC S24) Honestly, I think I like this site because it dares to be DIFFERENT. All of the other sites are headline/subheadline/cta/product image — which is fine! Those are definitely best practices, but I like seeing companies take a gamble. There’e something about the small video that makes it weird/compelling and makes me want to learn more! And finally, pap! (YC S24) This one is my *favorite* because it doing the 3 core things really well: 1. GREAT headline. It not only tells you what they do, but it invokes an emotional reaction: I’m getting ripped off by the man, and we’re the robin hood who’s going to fight for you, the consumer. I love that. 2. Really simple but effective imagery — just cutouts of images quickly cycling. Just so the customer knows: "Ok. Got it. This is for physical products." 3. Social proof. Their designer was able to seamlessly blend the main imagery with the positive feedback. Honorable Mention: Quetzal Labs Big bold claim: Copy and paste one line int my codebase and see if it works immediately. This is about time-to-value: If I can copy this, and have this translate my product in under a minute, you’ve definitely earned my business Remember: If you’re making a site, especially for a new product, make sure to have copy and imagery that not makes the customer say “Oh, I get it”, but also “And I totally understand the value” If you have that — you’re way ahead of the pack

8

2 Comments

Someone broke down the estimated costs of a $15 Sweetgreen salad. We need these cost graphics for digital health to help future founders. Especially for tech enabled cos, the greatest cost is labor. Much of the "value created" is in curation and matching, which means the gross margins are reliant on labor arbitrage. Pay someone $X, but get paid $X+Y% per visit. The challenge with healthcare is that you often have to pick one of two business models: 1. specialized, low volume, high cost, low gross margin % 2. generalized, high volume, low cost, high gross margin % I'd argue founders should focus on gross dollars over the lifetime of the customer (like Jeff Bezos said) instead of gross margin %'s, but we'll leave that for another time. The challenge is that many tech enabled digital health cos have high cost of goods sold (labor) and moderately high product, design, and engineering budgets. We must build differentiated solutions for patients, clinicians, and clients to be out incumbents, however, we're realizing that companies are ultimately valued on the discounted value of future cash flows. And the high SG&A costs at most organizations might be inbalanced to the unit economics of the business. I'm not sure the math pencils out for everyone unfortunately. But I'm just a guy on the internet, would love to hear the thoughts from those smarter than I (you!). Comment below. --- p.s. I have no idea the accuracy of the graphic and not an investor in Sweetgreen. Cheers. Credit: David Crowther

112

27 Comments

I recently saw this metric from Carta’s 1Q24 VC Fund Report, which is very concerning. DPI... is nowhere to be found in earlier vintages that probably should start showing DPI. Funding early-stage projects is great, but ultimately, these venture dollars need to exit their investments and pay back their limited partners. That’s where the metric Distributed to Paid-In Capital (DPI) comes in. While managing a fund, we get interim measures during the life of the fund (e.g. IRR, MOIC), but ultimately, “you can’t eat IRR.” If you want to build a lasting venture capital organization, you need to start showing DPI for your fund. Keep in mind that this is traditional VC data from Carta, and is not strictly crypto venture. Crypto venture tends to get liquidity earlier (tokens) and things tend to go parabolic sooner (faster, more unicorns) - but I’d wager that the data here is somewhat similar for Crypto VCs… Not as much DPI as there should be from these earlier vintages. Read the full article, as well as a recap of all the crypto fundraising rounds for August, here: https://lnkd.in/g3eVJ-iF

25

2 Comments

It was 15 minutes over the scheduled time but we were in the midst of a discussion that could not get cut short. We shifted into discussing my current endeavors with climate tech startups, the newsletter, podcast, and investing. That led me to sharing what in this inspired this refocus on conscious design — the death of my dad. Ultimately, I knew I was not done grieving and had wanted to run my own business for a while. Doing so gave me the space to run at my own pace in a society that mandates 2 weeks to grieve the death of a loved one and then it’s back to work as if you’re not struggling to stay alive yourself. Often being vulnerable creates a space for others to be open about their own struggles. As Brene Brown says, “Authenticity is the daily practice of letting go of who we think we're supposed to be and embracing who we actually are. Choosing authenticity means cultivating the courage to be imperfect, to set boundaries, and to be vulnerable.” I share about my dad openly because first, I have really come to peace with his passing and second, because I believe society does not talk about death enough. It’s shushed, swept under the rug, and “please numb yourself in the manner you’d prefer.” None of that resonates with me.... __ This is an excerpt from the conscious design newsletter. This Tuesday's edition is on burnout and the 7 types of rest with ideas from me. 😁 Read it with the link below. 👇🏽

13

13 Comments

Want a front-row seat to the frontier of tech? We’ve got the role (or two) for you! We’re expanding our frontier-tech team at Blackbird by hiring a Frontier Tech Investments Associate and Foundry Fellows! Got questions? We've got answers... 1️⃣ What are the roles? 🧪 Associate = a full-time VC investment gig in our Blackbird Investments team, working directly with me. We’re looking for someone with a science and/or engineering background and more curiosity than they can handle. You’ll grow your own investment brand and practice, support our portfolio founders, and will help build Foundry, our early-stage frontier-tech accelerator. ✨ Foundry Fellow = a casual/contract gig in our Blackbird Investments team, ~15h per week for 3 months. The Fellowship is ideal for PhD students and ECRs who want to learn more about startups and VC. You’ll go deep on emerging areas relevant to your expertise (or curiosity!), get a front-row seat to groundbreaking companies in those areas, build out your non-academic network, and develop a solid writing practice. 2️⃣ Why are you hiring? We love frontier tech, and we’re ready to grow our team. 3️⃣ Wow, it’s so great that you’re starting to look at deep tech! Look, we get it: we don’t make a lot of noise about our frontier tech investing. Buuuut we’ve been deep-tech investors since we backed Tim Kentley-Klay to found Zoox back in 2014—we’ve been on incredible journeys with PsiQuantum (building the world's first utility-scale quantum computer right here in Australia!), Inventia Life Science (transforming drug discovery with high-fidelity cell models), Remedy Robotics (surgical robots for remote endovascular procedures), Opto Biosystems (minimally-invasive neural implants to treat cancer), and more. We believe that frontier technologies, and great frontier-tech investing, will be part of the solutions to the greatest problems humanity faces today. 4️⃣ When do applications close? May 31st at 11:59pm AEST. 5️⃣ I have more questions! I’m sure you do! Clare Birch and I are hosting an AMA to answer any and all questions about these roles. Want to know what a week in the life of our team looks like? What’s keeping us up at night? What our ideal candidate looks like? Come along and find out - registration link in the comments 👇 Apply for these roles: Associate - https://lnkd.in/gCfj4EUJ Foundry Fellowships - https://lnkd.in/gj6ATZVZ If you know anyone that we should meet, send me their details! Cameron Elise Ben Andrew Robin Joseph Adelaide James Olivia Lucinda Raghav Jesse Christie Mohamed Tom Amee Pablo Haya Loong Hon Joshua Benjamin Megan Harry Denzil Matthew Diana Daniel Tom Deanna Justin Amar Lilly Stone Thomas

113

4 Comments

I posted some half-baked thoughts on “narrative shifts” yesterday on twitter, and figured I’d share here as well. Over my 15 years in startups, I’ve seen three distinct umbrella narratives for the tech ecosystem. The first started around 2007 or 2008, with the launch the iPhone and App Store. This was an era where founders were underdogs, and tech was a force for good. The industry had finished licking its wounds from the dot-com crash, and was the first to rebound from the Great Recession. The combined platform shifts of cloud and mobile were transformative for consumers and businesses alike, and startups painted themselves as “democratizing” forces. Even the bigger players were seen as challengers—Steve Jobs is probably the best figurehead for the optimism of this era. With the 2016 election came an era of reckoning. There was widespread soul searching in the aftermath of Trump’s victory—had tech, and Facebook specifically, undermined democracy? The Me Too movement swept the industry in 2017. Travis Kalanick, a pioneer in the prior narrative, was ousted from his company by his own investors. Meanwhile, valuations kept going up, and the SPAC frenzy began. The pandemic initially looked like it might put an end to the party, but no—venture funding skyrocketed while companies grappled with demands for more equitable practices in the wake of BLM. Coinbase was a poster company for this tension: a phenomenal IPO, and unrest within its ranks. Sam Bankman-Fried tried to meet the moment with a carefully crafted do-gooder image, but became our perfect villain instead. I think our third era started last year…I’ll call this the anti-hero narrative. The bottoming out of the startup ecosystem gave founders “permission” to do what needed to be done: mostly, layoffs. The tone became unapologetic. Elon led the way, slashing Twitter’s workforce, espousing free speech (the more shocking, the better). The spirit feels gleefully combative: anti-media, anti-woke, anti-DEI. The ethos of e/acc captures this moment: technological progress is inevitable and we should run after it at all costs. Zuckerberg is back, rehabilitated from the prior era with his chain necklace. Jensen Huang wasn’t toppled from his throne for signing a woman’s chest; it made him shinier. Progress is what matters, how we get there matters less. It’s too early to declare this most recent narrative baked, but the vibes have shifted! And of course, no era describes any one company, and no era is all good or all bad. Why does all this matter? The stories we tell about ourselves, about our industry, shape our reality. They influence what kinds of ideas and founders are backed. Where talent flocks. Where we’re willing to suspend disbelief. This is an especially interesting and challenging phase we’re entering: the newly combative spirit of the tech industry, paired with an AI platform shift that’s going to transform every sector, disrupt labor markets, and touch the lives of consumers. 

161

36 Comments

Infrastructure Support networks Never just one person Make mine a team Here’s a thought👇🏼 Stories have hero’s and villains, which both tend to focus on individuals. The founders story tends to be told in the singular. It’s what catches the eye and makes for better copy. Overcoming adversity tends to the plucky individual. But that’s not quite true is it? It’s good for storytelling and setting out the narrative but real life isn’t like that. It’s usually a pairs trade. Think Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger, think Morecambe and Wise, think Wozniak and Jobs, think Robert Miller and Chuck Feeney, think Laurel and Hardy. Why include comics in a list of uber-successful business leaders? Because the comics understand the mechanics at work here. The foil, the stooge, setting up the punch line and the delivery. Guess what in the field of business that is necessary too. Business is a team sport whatever the headline. Successful teams do need a centre pin as their leader to achieve success. Someone who takes the lead. But as the old wry comment reminds us leadership is easy but it’s no good if no one follows. Leaders need their teams to believe in the plan laid out before them. One of the advantages of the venture studio model is that it ensures that there is a team that are proven collaborators. This mitigates the risks in launching a new business. This is a strong hand in the world of early stage businesses. ThinkLikeAClient #GrumpyOptimist #TechStartUps #VentureStudios #Entrepreneur Footnote: all my content is written daily by me with no additives or tricks. If it interests you please tag the 🔔 in my profile to get it delivered straight to you. Otherwise if you search #GrumpyOptimist you’ll find my library of past posts. Never recycled, always fresh.

5

4 Comments

Venture-backed teams need an operating system built for venture-backed companies. That's why I created Peak OS. You can read about how to get started today in my bestselling book, Peak Teams--or just come on down to the Collective Genius site and let's talk. #venturebacked #vcbacked #venturecapital #leadership #ceo #founder #operatingsystem #peakOS

17

1 Comment

LAUNCHING A VC FIRM AS AN UNDERREPRESENTED MANAGER: COURAGEOUS, CRAZY, OR BOTH? 🤔 I read that only 2%-3% of all VC funds are led by Black General Partners (GPs). Maybe that’s why people keep calling me courageous for launching a VC firm as a new Black fund manager. Truthfully though, my whole life feels like one big exercise in doing the hardest $h!t imaginable. But here’s the thing: If you want to make a real dent in the universe, you can’t expect the path to be easy, right? For me, launching Kabila Ventures isn’t just about building a firm—it’s about leveling the playing field for overlooked founder teams worldwide. 🌎 It’s a calling, not a choice. So, to answer the question: Is it courageous? Maybe not. But I’ll admit... I’m definitely a little crazy. Here’s to the crazy ones—the ones who dare to do what others won’t. 🙌🏾 If you’re bold (or crazy) enough to consider launching your own VC firm as an underrepresented manager, check out my video for three tips to help you get started. Let’s build something that matters. 💪🏾 Together. Tally ho! 🤠 #VentureCapital #Entrepreneurship #DiversityInVC #VCtips #VC

53

29 Comments

I just had an insightful conversation with a founder at the airport who seemed to be struggling with fundraising. He asked a question that I believe is on the minds of many founders: “Do you have to be a good orator to raise funds?” At first glance, the question seems straightforward, but the answer is layered with complexity. It’s not just about being a great speaker—it’s about how you communicate your vision, passion, and leadership. This is something I’ve seen many founders—especially those with technical or engineering backgrounds—grapple with. Here’s the truth: Being a good orator isn’t an absolute requirement, but it can significantly impact your fundraising efforts. Why? Because, as VCs, when we see a founder who struggles to convey their ideas, several thoughts naturally run through our minds: 1. If they can’t clearly articulate their vision to us, how will they rally their team and early employees behind that dream? 2. Do they truly understand their product or market deeply enough to explain it simply and effectively? 3. Are they confident in themselves and their ability to lead this company? 4. Since VCs are financially motivated, can this founder effectively raise future rounds? So yes, the ability to convey your ideas, passion, and motivation matters a lot—not just for investors, but also for your team and customers. I’ve seen this with some of our portfolio founders. Here’s some advice we’ve given them, which has helped them navigate these challenges: 1. Find a co-founder with a business/sales background. It strengthens your team and ensures better communication with investors. 2. If a co-founder isn’t an option, hire a Chief of Staff or Investor Relations lead who can take on the communication and fundraising efforts. 3. Prepare, prepare, and prepare. Pitching is a skill. The more you practice, the better you’ll get at delivering a strong, confident message. 4. Don’t put too much pressure on yourself. I know, as an entrepreneur, every meeting feels like a make-or-break moment. But it’s better to stay calm and handle questions as they come rather than overthink and fumble. 5. Learn from great speakers. Observe their body language, rhythm, and confidence. Practice those elements in your own way. 6. Treat oratory as a critical founder skill. Just like you develop skills in finance, business development, or operations, work on your communication abilities. One important aspect I haven’t touched on here is the power of storytelling—because that’s a whole skill in itself. But before you master storytelling, you need to first build your confidence in conveying ideas effectively. I’d love to hear your thoughts: How important do you think oration is for a founder? #Founders #StartupAdvice #Entrepreneurship #Fundraising #Leadership #CommunicationSkills #PublicSpeaking #VC

18

3 Comments

Half of LinkedIn has already weighed in on Paul Graham's recent essay Founder Mode, which criticized the approach of running large companies with "efficient managers." The discussion was sparked by Brian Chesky, who, during an event at YC, lamented that hired management nearly destroyed his company. Everyone in attendance nodded in agreement. Let’s set aside the fact that guys in Patagonia vests may not be the best sample for assessing the success of "Founder Mode." The success of some of these individuals is hard to replicate, not just in other countries, but even in the U.S. under high-interest-rate conditions. Survivorship bias in action. The key question here is: are motivation and accountability for the company’s mission the critical factors for a startup's success? In my opinion, they come second, right after the ability to continuously learn and adapt to changes in the company. For example, the founders of Instagram stepped aside at the right time (maybe unwillingly), allowing efficient managers to build the second-largest social network in the world and a huge cash cow for Meta. An efficient manager, Imran Khan, came to Snapchat from Alibaba, helping the company make a great IPO and improving a lot as a CSO. Bill Gates handed over management to one of his early employees, Steve Ballmer, who in turn passed it to Satya Nadella, allowing Microsoft to become one of the world’s largest companies. Steve Jobs long resisted the necessity of releasing the iPhone and was ultimately convinced by multiple managers, who saved the company, which at the time was relying on a single product line. My conclusion from the stories above: one must constantly learn and evolve to align with the product's tempo. If you fall short due to a lack of skills, motivation, or health, it's better to let more flexible and competent people handle these challenges. You can't blame failure in people management on an inherent flaw in the hired management system.

21

Why it matters: Even in a muted fundraising environment, legacy firms can beat their own fundraising goals (a16z's marketing had cited a $6.9 billion target). About half of the targeted capital was aimed for its growth fund, though a16z ultimately raised $3.75 billion for it. Instead of dedicated seed or early-stage funds, it's splitting them in sectors. It raised $1.25 billion for its AI infrastructure allocation (originally targeting 15%), $1 billion for AI apps (also initially targeting 15%), and $600 million for its "American Dynamism" strategy (an original target of 10%). Lastly, it raised $600 million for its second gaming fund, which was targeted as 10% of the fund.

13

Thanks Chinenye. I couldn't agree with you more. However while we work on this, we also have to be mindful of the fact that bias isn't just the problem in this data rather a combination of poor economy and bias. Of all these regions mentioned, Africa is the least performing market. therefore Davidson, naturally you would expect investors to do less there. They are not charity organisations but a venture set up for outsized returns.Therefore the major issue we should be discussing is, which sectors are receiving this funding in Africa? Are the investments coming to sectors that will lift the other sectors up fundamentally or to sectors that will window dress the issues? or Worst still the ones that will reap-off on the people and distort rather than disrupt the system. (eg Nigeria POS fintech and the real banking system. a discussion for another day). Until strong investments are made in the technology sectors powering manufacturing strong job growth in Africa be it REAL B2B eCommerce not repeating what is already being done, or B2C eCommerce that is truly efficient and cost effective. Equally important is the improvement in the purchasing power of the consumers via credit card system. in as much as Sub-Sahara Africa lacks good credit system that captures the average citizens and residents, B2C will continue to struggle. in as much as our logistics investments are predominantly in the last mile delivery rather than efficient crosborder logistics, both B2B abd B2C eCommerce will struggle to scale efficiently and profitability. So, it's time for the investors to do away with the low hanging fruits and start tackling the real issues that will empower and propel Africa economies. That's where the main bias lies.

4

1 Comment

👀 Founders who are the right fight for the Community VC forums and Iceberg 👀 The most successful founders—the top 0.1%—achieve remarkable outcomes by systematically building vast networks of investors and supporters, leveraging them for capital, promotion, and critical resources. Companies like Zeroco (raising $5m in 7 hours from 3082 supporters) and Superhuman (raising $75m off the back of a 50k person waitlist) are prime examples. However, most founders: 👉 Lack the experience, network, or structured approach to replicate this success 👉 Spend 10+ hours a week chasing support (emailing, booking meetings, having pointless conversations) with little predictability or payoff 👉 Leave untapped value on the table with their investors and advocates That’s why we’ve built Community VC as a growth engine and Iceberg, a supporter CRM designed to replicate Zeroco and Superhumans’ success by helping founders attract, nurture, and activate their first 10, 100, and 1,000 supporters. In the past 6 months we have supported 30+ companies in building their supporter base to close capital for less than 3 hours per week (compared to 10 normally) and we’re still improving. We have 100 founders working with us and 500 on our waitlist. Every week we are receiving 10+ new sign ups, with zero marketing spend so far. A recent example of ROI on 10 nurtured supporters through our ecosystem by a founder: ✅ 3 months ✅ 15 hours total spent nurturing ✅ 50 referred deals ✅ $24,500 revenue 💯 That’s $326 per hour per advocate nurtured in revenue 💯 Plus investment of $25,000 Imagine if a founder who was gearing up for a raise of any type had an army of 100 or 1000 people who could be activated at an even better ROI with an automated, personalised system... How? 👉Founders uncover investors through their own network, via Community VC and other channels by distributing their Iceberg profile links 👉The link collects supporter data and adds them to the systematised Supporter CRM 👉The founders are prompted with evolving best practice investor comms to nurture and engage the supporters for help and capital Not only are founders attracting more supporters than they ever were, they are closing capital faster and with more aligned people with Community VC and Iceberg. 🕐Why now? The future of outsized returns will come by supporting small teams who can achieve huge amounts in extremely niche sectors, with much less funding. They will achieve this through leveraging AI and leveraging their community.

6

I'm seeing a lot of "VC vs Bootstrap" posts proliferate these days, and it's usually somebody trying to sell you some bullshit course or newsletter foaming at the mouth at how terrible VCs are or hard VC funding is. Here are the myths I'd like to dispel based on my 6+ years of experience as a venture-backed founder: 1. "Bootstrap to $5M ARR and you'll be financially free. I did it and so can you." They conveniently ignore the thousands upon thousands of founders who can't get past the MVP / idea stage because they can't build a commercially viable product without funding. Real talk - it is EXTREMELY hard to build a $5M ARR business in general, let alone with no capital. The seed to Series B (usually 7-12M ARR) graduation rate is about ~8%, and this is with 7-8 figures of raised capital. Now imagine what it would be with no funding. If you can build a $5M ARR business self-funded, you should absolutely do so, but just know that you're playing the game on ultra-hard mode. For every bootstrap success story you hear, there are 100 that have failed. ------- 2. "VCs are toxic and you'll lose control of your company" Bad investors make juicy stories, but there are a lot of good investors out there who will always act in the best interests of the company. VCs play the long game, and screwing over founders to create a bad reputation for themselves doesn't make them money. Also, unless you take a bad deal, you shouldn't lose control of your company until Series B. Also, "losing control" isn't the end of the world. Since the latest round I no longer have board control, and I even have a boss now - but it's the best decision I've ever made because I believe in the people we have around the table. ------- 3. "VCs fund 5 out of 1,000 deals. You'll never get funded" This is such a bullshit defeatist mentality. This is like saying "Deloitte only hires 4% of applicants. You'll never get a job there". Deloitte's offer rate is low because they receive a lot of low quality applications. Put together a high quality application and your chances go up exponentially. Same goes for VCs, put together a strong team, a venture-fundable business plan, and a strong deck, and somebody will bite (although I'd still expect to talk to 20-30+ funds before you see an offer) ------- 4. "Bootstrapping will impose fiscal discipline on your company" I don't have a huge issue with this because it is somewhat true, and we've all heard the stories of founders raising huge amounts of funding and squandering it. But what VC funding does for you is it gives you margin for error. Hires sometimes suck, tools sometimes don't work out, contractors sometimes underperform. Having funding allows you to make some of these mistakes and course correct without the company just outright dying because you ran out of cash. ----------------- Hope this is helpful - I don't have a newsletter and I have nothing to sell you so feel free to DM if you have any questions.

130

31 Comments

Kettleborough VC has been active for ~6 years, invested in ~30 companies, gone through ~80 funding rounds, witnessed ~12 exits including ~4 instances of partial principal erosion, seen ~4 seed to $100M journeys, tracking ~29% XIRR across the portfolio. A couple of IPOs from the portfolio surely seem very much in line ahead.

257

17 Comments

A SAFE and convertible note had a baby and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati was the midwife- out popped the D-SAFE! 👶🏽🎉 A new #climatetech funding instrument was announced by Elemental Excelerator last week. One of the company’s main goals is to support smaller, up and coming companies during the awkward “Scale Gap” phase between #VC funding and natural growth. It’s called the #DSAFE (Development Simple Agreement for Future Equity) and it aims to aid the process by giving companies a small amount of cash to overcome initial risks and expenses during the developmental stages of a product launch or company. How does it work? D-SAFE has a redemption clause meaning companies can choose to have their payments offered as a loan or convert to equity at the investor’s discretion. Funders and companies will have clear communication and expectations about where the money is going and how it will be applied to either the company or the projects at hand. Financiers and companies will work together with more #transparency, and that’s a great boon for #startups and VC alike. As of this month, Elemental has already invested using D-SAFE in eight different companies, including Dimensional Energy and Origen — both companies investing in innovative and out-of-the-box solutions to environmental issues! Seems like a win-win on the surface. What do you all think about the D-SAFE? Alfredo Coppola Momoka Ueda Tim Wagner Stephen D. Torres Olya Irzak Natsuho Toyama Noriya Tarutani Shin Ogawa

15

6 Comments