
$1M angel funds for technical founders - nivi
https://www.spearhead.co/class-3
======
nader_alnaji
I’m a member of cohort 2 and have made a few investments thus far and my
experience has been very positive, up to and including feeling very strongly
that this program has the potential to change the landscape of venture not
unlike what YC did many years ago. However, understanding that changing the
landscape is a “home run outcome” and perhaps a stretch for most, I think it’s
important to clarify that even if it doesn’t do that, I believe it still adds
a very large amount of unique value to both the “spears” on the investing side
and the entrepreneurs who get funding from them. Below are some comments on my
experiences:

As a Spear I’m on the investing side and being involved in this program
basically gave me a reason to talk to entrepreneurs doing cool things where I
would normally just be heads down focused on my own work. It’s one of these
things where I see a lot of people starting things randomly and I like talking
to other entrepreneurs, especially ones who are just getting started, but
without the concrete potential for working together in some way, eg through an
investment, I couldn’t justify it being worth it to myself to take my
attention off my work (and I believe the same applies to them to them, for
that matter). The spearhead program changed this for me in several ways: A)
The support of the people there including Brian Norgard and Naval Ravikant as
experts made it so that instead of talking to an entrepreneur and thinking “I
have no idea how to think about this” and then passing, I could talk to
someone who’s seen hundreds of deals and learn much faster about what a good
deal looks like and, moreover, what a good portfolio looks like, than if I
were doing it on my own. Basically instead of starting by allocating capital
poorly initially and having to learn the hard way from the mistakes, you get
most of that experience from mentorship up-front and start from a much better
position. I’m not sure if/how other programs, eg so-called “scout programs,”
deal with this fwiw, but the level of involvement and advice is basically as
high as it can be in my opinion, and the fact that this would become a great
learning opportunity was very important for me in deciding to do it.

B) Because there are other Spears in the cohort and because the program is
really good about having events at regular intervals, you wind up meeting
really great people and, more importantly, having a common goal that serves as
a base to discuss things with them and get to know them. It’s important to
stress this because without having that common goal of being a great investor
to bind everyone together and make us want to learn from each other’s
experiences in a specific way I think it’d be harder to break the ice with the
people. And the people are really strong, basically founders of top-tier
companies. I didn’t do yc but I imagine the idea of being mixed with a lot of
top tier people doing the same thing is similar to what happens there.

C) Building a track record and brand. One more important thing I’ll mention is
that I’d looked at “scout” programs before and deemed them not really worth my
time since it’s basically a referral bonus if the vc you send a company to
invests in the company. In some sense it has some of the benefits mentioned
above, but the thing that really made spearhead different in this regard, in
my opinion, is the fact that it’s me alone making the final investment
decision (there’s some oversight but they really mean it when they say it’s
your fund). This motivates me much more not only to do the program in the
first place but also to be involved with the company I invest in to make sure
it succeeds. As a random example, for one entrepreneur, after deciding to
invest, I offered to sit in on one of the pitches they had with another
investor to give them feedback on how they can improve how they’re
communicating their story (afterward not during the pitch). We both thought it
was a weird thing to do when I offered it, but they decided to try it and
afterward found it so helpful to have someone straight-shooter criticize what
they’re saying and how they’re coming across that I offer it to every company
I want to invest in now (I think it also sent a good signal to the investor on
the call that another investor cares enough to help at that level). And that’s
something I just don’t think I’d do if there wasn’t some kind of personal
reputation or scoreboard at stake (what can I say— I’m a competitive fool).
And the value for the entrepreneur from goofy guys like me running around and
thinking differently than a normal vc with ideas like “hey I get what you’re
doing and I like it a lot but I think your pitch/delivery needs work; why
don’t I just sit in on one of your pitches and give you feedback after,” is
exactly the kind of cool thing that happens when you try new things like this
imo, and it’s one of the reasons I think the program has so much potential for
both sides (spear/investor and entrepreneur).

There are other things I’m likely missing but as this post is getting long,
I’ll leave it at that. Reading over it again I’m a bit surprised to notice
that I left out the fact that you get capital to invest, but I think the
reality is that the actual funding they give you is the most “commodity-like”
aspect of what it is.

Edit: formatting

