Comments on: Who Should Attend Your VC Pitch?

By: Twitted by willcritchlow

Twitted by willcritchlow — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 02:26:33 +0000

[...] This post was Twitted by willcritchlow [...]

By: links for 2009-07-25 « Blarney Fellow

links for 2009-07-25 « Blarney Fellow — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 01:13:27 +0000

[...] Who Should Attend Your VC Pitch? « Both Sides of the Table (tags: startup vc) [...]

By: Shane

Shane — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 19:49:06 +0000

Mark, you should publish an e-book titled “100 things to not do during fundraising.” I find that knowing what mistakes to avoid is almost more important than knowing precisely what to do.

Shane

By: marksuster

marksuster — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 16:44:58 +0000

Unfortunately he didn’t do the right thing. He got the meeting but not the investment. In my opinion the CEO would have been much better off to be on the call and then divide out responsibilities for who talked about which topics. When you’re selling products to clients many CEO’s will say, “My VP Sales is better at selling so I’ll just let him get on a plane to see customers,” but customers always want to see the top dog. The reason is that when you’re dealing with an early stage company you know that success / failure of your project will come down to the leadership of the company. Raising money is no different. Another team member may be more versed in “pitching” but VCs always want to hear from the top dog. That’s just reality – like it or not.

By: Rajat

Rajat — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 06:03:19 +0000

to Kyle’s comment, I think you assume that ‘in-demand’ people will only take the highest paying offer. In fact, I’ve found otherwise. The top people are often looking for new , exciting challenges with a much higher upside, and thats the void a startup can fill that a big company simply can’t.

By: trevelyan

trevelyan — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 05:51:39 +0000

>> . It isn’t the CEO’s forte and he’s asked me to
>> handle it.” Wrong. A large part of being a CEO is

If it really wasn’t the CEO’s forte, he did the right thing sending the guy who succeeded in getting the meeting. Sounds like you were more concerned about issues of face than anything else.

By: marksuster

marksuster — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 05:34:29 +0000

No, not really. I’m an irreverent realist.

By: marksuster

marksuster — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 05:32:14 +0000

Kyle, we’ll have to agree to disagree but I appreciate you putting your opinion forward. Obviously it is a subjective topic. My view is formed from the number of times I’ve seen CEO’s who tell me, “if I only had cash I could recruit a great team” and yet I see other CEO’s who somehow have this magnetism, inspiration and compelling vision that causes people to want to quit their jobs and join forces in order to not miss the opportunity. I think reasonable companies can be built by the former but the truly great companies are built by the latter. Since I’m looking for extra-ordinary returns I’m afraid I have to look for those opportunities.

By: Kyle Cordes

Kyle Cordes — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 03:28:14 +0000

I think the bias again a staffer who will join full-time once a startup has funding, is unjustified. Rather, I think it is great for a startup to aim high and recruit in-demand people with lots of compelling job options. Such people tend to be quite busy with a paying work, which they will rationally keep doing until the startup can afford to pay at least some salary. Obviously a key team member who won’t go full-time post-funding is another matter entirely.

(Unqualified opinion warning: so far I’ve bootstrapped two businesses and gone the VC route on zero businesses.)

By: Mr nice

Mr nice — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 03:09:51 +0000

You seem like an arrogant elitist.