It makes it sound like all startups out there have a RIGHT to be funded, and annoying, idiotic VCs just say no them... how mean of them.
But plenty of startup ideas are BS, plenty of founders are incompetent, and they don't automatically deserve a VC's ear, let alone their money. Why do they think they have the right to an audience? I know that you can have exceptions (Harry Potter was rejected by some 12 publishers before Bloomsbury took it), but if no VC is willing to even listen to you, consider that you are the problem, and not the VC industry.
I know that a bit of boundless optimism on behalf of the founders is needed for startups to succeed, but exercise that optimism in your own time and on your own dime.
I wonder if part of this tone is attributed to the culture of seeking permissions that VC's have in part smartly funded to create through their marketing and reach.
Want to innovate? Get VC blessing and money.
Want to create something? Get external validation first from a funder.
Even thought the vast majority of startups are self-funded, the mindshare of VC messaging in the space is dis-proportionate.
This leaves a real question, if getting funding is about leverage, getting some traction and revenue first is not a bad thought. It's really nice to see YC being a beacon of support in this regards too.
No one deserves money. The predominant VC culture doesn't deserve the right to shoot down people by stringing them out, or making them feel they aren't adequate, when no one is. Ideas are rarely good in the beginning and need time to form and develop like the entrepreneur... but the idea that you can't get anywhere without funding is a big fallacy. A word like deal flow on the wrong kind of VC's lips is cringeworthy.
Even learning to get good at freelancing, contracting and consulting teaches you enough business skills that are transferrable to most startups, not to mention being able to make some amount of seed money that would be available through funding.
I wouldn't say this about YC because they have a true founder support culture to go with the value add from leadership. I really hope this model of funding and investing in the person over the idea spreads widely.
The best funding and validation is from your clients. Scaling and growth funding is much easier to find.
No VC wants to become famous as the VC who said no to the next unicorn. That's another reason they don't explicitly say no. A 'no' is not a judgment on your whole existence, and it's mostly not personal. It's a judgment on your current state.
But most people don't say it that way. They go all "See mom you didn't believe in me but I told you I'd become something".
Well your mom didn't believe in you because you were smoking pot and failing all your classes when you were 16 and had half a foot in prison. Good for you if you managed to turn your life around but don't blame mom for her lack of confidence.
Yeah, I was kind of shocked at the level of entitlement displayed here. Pitching VC's is just like any other sales process, and its not uncommon to have a low hit rate, even if you have a good idea.
Shocker: most VC's will have a very different conversation with you if you've put a little time into building the relationship before you ask them for money!
Most VC's success stories go something like "oh yeah, I met this crazy person, and they just kept at it, and at some point I was convinced and put money in! Now its AirBnB!"
AirBnB couldn't convince Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures to invest in two attempts and despite PG pleading with him.
Most of their early success was in NYC yet that didn't stop
Sequoia from funding them. Now Wilson keeps a box of their "Cap'n McCains" cereal in the board room to remind him.
It makes it sound like all startups out there have a RIGHT to be funded, and annoying, idiotic VCs just say no them... how mean of them.
But plenty of startup ideas are BS, plenty of founders are incompetent, and they don't automatically deserve a VC's ear, let alone their money. Why do they think they have the right to an audience? I know that you can have exceptions (Harry Potter was rejected by some 12 publishers before Bloomsbury took it), but if no VC is willing to even listen to you, consider that you are the problem, and not the VC industry.
I know that a bit of boundless optimism on behalf of the founders is needed for startups to succeed, but exercise that optimism in your own time and on your own dime.