
My least favorite VC behaviour?  - dwynings
http://asack.typepad.com/a_sack_of_seattle/2011/07/my-least-favorite-vc-behaviour.html
======
rdl
A common (although I haven't seen it) but also lame VC thing is for them to
say "No, we don't want to invest, because ..." where "..." is some random
reason which sounds plausible and is non-confrontational ("we want to see more
traction") vs. the real reason ("we think your team sucks", "we like a
competitor more", "we don't actually make new investments, since we couldn't
raise another fund").

As many have said, believe the No, but not anything that comes after it.

------
fosk
And then, when your company gets some serious press/traction/money they
usually call you back again acting like best friends who always thought you
had a great idea.

~~~
tomjen3
Maybe one should make it clear that if they don't take you up on your offer
now, they won't have the opportunity to do that later.

Obviously this should only be done with second rate firms, but since most
deals don't make them any money they cannot afford to miss the few which do
make money.

------
lisper
With VC's you always have to consider the possibility that they have already
funded a potential competitor, and that they are actively but subtly trying to
hinder you in order to help that competitor. You even have to keep this
possibility in mind after they have funded you, because they may view writing
you a check as simply a cost-effective way of keeping you under control.

~~~
hugh3
Don't VCs publish lists of the companies in their portfolio?

The first part is sensible, the second part sounds a bit paranoid. I've never
heard of a VC funding a company that competes with another one in their
portfolio, just to sabotage it.

~~~
lisper
> Don't VCs publish lists of the companies in their portfolio?

Yes, but only _after_ they make the investment. If they're still in
negotiations you generally won't know.

> the second part sounds a bit paranoid. I've never heard of a VC funding a
> company that competes with another one in their portfolio, just to sabotage
> it

I confess this is pure conjecture on my part, and it would be pretty
farfetched for a VC to make a _major_ investment for this purpose. But many
VC's have seed funds now. For $100k they can buy an awful lot of influence at
an early stage company, and the interests of that company may or may not align
with the interests of the VC's overall portfolio.

The chances are small, but I think not completely discountable, especially in
cases like the one described by the OP.

------
skarayan
From my understanding, VCs don't like to decline so that they don't close any
doors. They may not want to fund at the time, but may jump on it later.

~~~
daniel-cussen
Do they any make an effort to leave the door ajar?:

"We'd like to back you, but we need to see more traction before we can. Come
back when you have enough to make funding merely a bold move (by VC standards)
and less of a leap of faith, as based on objective milestones."

That plus a few revisions. Has anyone seen this in the wild?

~~~
Terretta
> _Has anyone seen this in the wild?_

It's practically a meme:

<http://d.pr/nJpH>

EDIT: Tracked down the Tumblr where I saw that slide:

[http://bryc3.com/post/172703130/i-ganked-this-slide-from-
joe...](http://bryc3.com/post/172703130/i-ganked-this-slide-from-joe-
beninatos)

Slide text:

    
    
      How VCs Say "No"
    
      - <strike>"No"</strike>
      - They don't return your calls or emails
      - "We love what you're doing but would like to see more progress"
      - "We'd like to see what your beta looks like"
      - "Have you thought about hiring a _____"
      - "Have you thought about approaching _____"
      - "We're interested, but we don't want to lead."

