

What VCs look for in startup pitches - jackyyappp
http://e27.sg/2012/07/25/a-must-read-before-making-an-venture-capitalist-pitch/

======
fragsworth
I get two different stories from different crowds on this issue.

From many VCs and angels themselves - at least the ones that get their
articles upvoted on this site - I get the impression that they dislike being
bullshitted at. They hate people who are disingenuous. They don't care too
much about projections or future plans. They just want to see how good your
team is.

From everyone else in the industry (those looking for investment, those who
have found investment, executives in large companies, etc.) I hear a
completely different story. Tell them the world. Make projections bigger than
you think is realistic. Talk yourself up. Show interest in things that the VCs
are interested in - even if you aren't. Create a story of the future that will
please the investors. This is not always exactly the same story you _really_
want to go with.

Now I really prefer doing the former to the latter. I just don't know how
effective it really is and I hear different stories about how to behave when
searching for investment. VCs and angels aren't mind-readers, they aren't
super-human, and they have the same failings as everyone else. If you can get
away with the latter without _appearing_ dishonest, you might have a better
chance at bagging the investment deal.

~~~
drumdance
Recently on a date with a non-tech person I described my company as "not
likely to be a billion dollar company, but a good one nonetheless." She was
shocked that I would even mention the b-word. I need to get out more. :-)

~~~
biot
Not to burst your bubble, but from the standpoint of pure probability it's not
likely to be a million dollar idea either. However, I don't know anything
about you or your company so maybe you've beaten the odds and your company is
on track to having an arms-length valuation greater than a million dollars
already.

~~~
drumdance
I agree completely. My point is that when I'm talking to entrepreneur types
this sort of talk is shorthand for how I describe the company's potential.

------
atirip
Help me out here please.

One would think that any VC's absolute core, essential, vital skill would be
"read between the lines", "see through", "smell the stuff"? So they can pick
the best investments regardless of the pitch. Like having a sixth sense. If
you can't do that, what good are you investing?

But no. Sometimes I feel that even YC is become pitching contest, not startup
contest. Countless on stories here on how to act, say things, what to wear,
what to do etc. Is it really come to that, that even PG picks best pitches,
not best idea/teams. If yes, why do you bother to apply? If no, why do you
bother to polish the pitches?

I have hired lot of people to work for my small businesses througt the years.
I have always read between the CV lines, thrashed the "best" ones and picked
"worst" ones, they all turned out great workers. So?

~~~
borplk
This bugs me too. I really don't want to subject myself, the team or my
company to such arbitrary judgements. I wouldn't want the money, suggestions
or control of an investor who liked the company because of what I wear or the
buzz words I threw. I'd rather work on the idea/company to get it to the point
that it automatically attracts the right investors.

------
pedalpete
Is it just me or does Vincent Lauria stand out as the one guy in the bunch
that I wouldn't want to pitch (or have a beer with).

I've noticed this trend with VC's I've met. The bigger the VC name, the more
respectful they are of entrepreneurs and what they go through.

I know there are lots of people who pitch bad ideas, but that is what having
good deal flow is about. Getting your schedule so packed with good
people/businesses that their is no room for the ones that wouldn't make it.

~~~
lusr
What didn't you like about him? He seemed keen on a solid business principles
and that's great. Only thing I didn't like is the desire for a 2+ person team,
because ownership is everything, but that's hardly an unfair request - there's
far greater risk investing in one person.

~~~
pedalpete
I actually just went back to the post, and they've edited the original
article. He initially had a long list of things which included (something
like) #2 don't pitch me another group buying site, #4 seriously, don't pitch
me another group buying site.

It wasn't the his content was wrong, he should say how he feels. But it had a
very negative and condescending tone to it.

The edited article is much... smoother.

Also if you compare the other VCs in the article, much of it is about what
they want, rather than what they don't.

I have nothing personally against Vinnie, I've never met him, never heard of
him before. But in the first version of the article he really stood out
against the others in what I thought was a negative light.

------
dinkumthinkum
I mean that's great and everything. I love it. But. If the past and the
present was so great, I wouldn't need money. I think Mark Hsu's paragraph on
"Avoid overusing buzzwords" was pretty good; I think the avoid "Netflix for
Pandas" thing is commonsense now but the notion that should actually use
specific numbers when making your pitches can't be shouted enough.

~~~
patio11
_If the past and the present was so great, I wouldn't need money._

Not to put words in anybody's mouth, but given that one can reasonably deliver
a production-quality software product for hard costs lower than a college
student has in their checking account these days _and also_ pound the pavement
selling it and/or have customer acquisition channels proved viable in
microscale, you don't necessarily have to be rolling in it to a) have numbers
which demonstrate traction while b) not having nearly enough to make the next
big steps like bringing on multiple people at market salaries.

I'm only a mentor at 500Startups and don't have decisionmaking authority, but
I'd predict that if you had a story like "We built a $WIDGET for doctors
offices, cold called 100 people, got 10 meetings, and sold two systems for $1k
a month each. To take this to $1 million a year we need a) a customer
acquisition specialist, b) two engineers to firm up the feature set, and c)
money to play with more scalable channels. That costs holy-OMG more than $2k a
month." the answer would be "That is intriguing and we want to hear more."

------
nagarch
same as ? [http://web2asia.blognhanh.com/2012/07/a-must-read-before-
mak...](http://web2asia.blognhanh.com/2012/07/a-must-read-before-making-any-
venture_24.html)

~~~
jackyyappp
yes if you scroll down the article you mentioned it links back to the original
post at e27

