David Green

Want a front-row seat to the frontier of tech? We’ve got the role (or two) for you! We’re expanding our frontier-tech team at Blackbird by hiring a Frontier Tech Investments Associate and Foundry Fellows! Got questions? We've got answers... 1️⃣ What are the roles? 🧪 Associate = a full-time VC investment gig in our Blackbird Investments team, working directly with me. We’re looking for someone with a science and/or engineering background and more curiosity than they can handle. You’ll grow your own investment brand and practice, support our portfolio founders, and will help build Foundry, our early-stage frontier-tech accelerator. ✨ Foundry Fellow = a casual/contract gig in our Blackbird Investments team, ~15h per week for 3 months. The Fellowship is ideal for PhD students and ECRs who want to learn more about startups and VC. You’ll go deep on emerging areas relevant to your expertise (or curiosity!), get a front-row seat to groundbreaking companies in those areas, build out your non-academic network, and develop a solid writing practice. 2️⃣ Why are you hiring? We love frontier tech, and we’re ready to grow our team. 3️⃣ Wow, it’s so great that you’re starting to look at deep tech! Look, we get it: we don’t make a lot of noise about our frontier tech investing. Buuuut we’ve been deep-tech investors since we backed Tim Kentley-Klay to found Zoox back in 2014—we’ve been on incredible journeys with PsiQuantum (building the world's first utility-scale quantum computer right here in Australia!), Inventia Life Science (transforming drug discovery with high-fidelity cell models), Remedy Robotics (surgical robots for remote endovascular procedures), Opto Biosystems (minimally-invasive neural implants to treat cancer), and more. We believe that frontier technologies, and great frontier-tech investing, will be part of the solutions to the greatest problems humanity faces today. 4️⃣ When do applications close? May 31st at 11:59pm AEST. 5️⃣ I have more questions! I’m sure you do! Clare Birch and I are hosting an AMA to answer any and all questions about these roles. Want to know what a week in the life of our team looks like? What’s keeping us up at night? What our ideal candidate looks like? Come along and find out - registration link in the comments 👇 Apply for these roles: Associate - https://lnkd.in/gCfj4EUJ Foundry Fellowships - https://lnkd.in/gj6ATZVZ If you know anyone that we should meet, send me their details! Cameron Elise Ben Andrew Robin Joseph Adelaide James Olivia Lucinda Raghav Jesse Christie Mohamed Tom Amee Pablo Haya Loong Hon Joshua Benjamin Megan Harry Denzil Matthew Diana Daniel Tom Deanna Justin Amar Lilly Stone Thomas

114

4 Comments

I've received great advice while navigating the VC environment, so I wanted to return the favor and share some findings. To achieve a power-law outcome, I'm finding alignment with the right VC comes down to three priority areas: Team, Market, and Product. 1) A-Level TEAM: The optimal VC not only invests in our product, but gets to know our leadership team...how we solve tough problems, pivot when necessary, and execute relentlessly across product and GTM. My belief has always been: "A-players recruit A-players (they're fueled by excellence)...B-players recruit C-players (they're intimidated by excellence)." 2) Distribution in a Growing MARKET: Many VCs want to invest in AI disruptors, but the right VC for Base64 adds more than $...they add distribution to our innovation. In a data market where AI entrants can disrupt slow-moving incumbents, cracking distribution is invaluable. 3) Strong PRODUCT: The best VCs ask questions that stress-test our product's defensibility / moat. While we can't foresee every future turn, we need to have the mental agility to adapt faster than the competition. These conversations also hone our value proposition and deepen our moat. Bottom Line: In most instances the right VC doesn’t just invest $...they invest time, expertise, and belief in building sustainable value as a partner. This equally requires a management team to be humble enough to acknowledge that with the right VC they are 'better together'. I'm also learning to watch out for the 'yellow flags': 1) The “invest and rest” mentality, where support fades after the funding round closes. 2) The “seagull” approach, where they swoop in, create a mess, and off they go. One of the greats, Battery Ventures, recently released 'State of the OpenCloud 2024' report, which provides valuable insights on how AI is catalyzing a new technology supercycle, with the potential to disrupt core cloud industry dynamics. Definitely worth a read. https://lnkd.in/ekzdR8bS #BatteryVentures #VentureCapital #SustainableGrowth #Distribution #Leadership

32

1 Comment

YC founders: here's a harsh truth that might help you when hiring. Great people want to work with great people. But...A-players hire A-players. B-players hire C-players. Keeping the hiring bar relentlessly high is critical, especially early on. A single person that isn’t great can drag the quality down of the entire team. Folks will look around and realize the standards are lower than they thought. They’ll realize that they don’t need to be as good. They’ll realize they can learn less from their colleagues. People make the organization, not the other way around. And that if you don’t have great people, you won’t have a great organization.

14

1 Comment

🎙️ Exciting insights from SaaS Academy's CEO Johnny Page on the Expertise Economy podcast! Johnny breaks down their two-step approach to helping SaaS founders: 1️⃣ The Discovery Call: Uncovering the founder's "why" and long-term vision 2️⃣ The Strategic Game Plan Session: Creating a 90-day action plan to achieve 12-month goals 🔑 Key focus: Identifying and solving business constraints Want to dive deeper on the secrets of building a successful SaaS business? Check out the full episode here: https://lnkd.in/dju-Be2u #SaaS #BusinessStrategy #SaasAcademy #ExpertiseEconomy #Podcast

6

At Forum we look at thousands of deals each year across our Accelerator and Pre-Seed funds but only end up investing in a little over 1% of those startups.  As an early stage VC, I am in the business of saying no to nearly every startup I meet, and while there is nuanced rationale for many of the startups I pass on, a vast majority of businesses that don’t meet the qualification to get funded typically fall into one of two buckets. ▪ First time founders have a tendency to go out to market too early to raise pre-seed capital ▪   I’m sure most founders have heard some iteration of this from VCs that ultimately pass on their business.  In some cases it's a blanket excuse covering up for other pass reasons- perhaps a VC doesn’t believe in a team or isn’t bullish on the market opportunity - but in many cases founders simply haven't proven enough to the market to warrant an investment. I meet many teams with an articulate vision for the product that they want to build, but they either haven't performed enough customer discovery to prove demand for their initial wedge product, or need to raise pre-seed capital to build out an MVP.  In those cases, pre-seed investors are unwilling to underwrite those risks.  To be default fundable, teams need to be able to keep costs low, perform extensive customer discovery, and ship some version of an early product - pilots and early paid customers are key. A huge piece of this is having founding engineering talent on the team. ▪Not every startup is a venture opportunity ▪ By definition, a venture backed business is solving a problem within a market opportunity so massive and so desperately needed, that its growth rate is off the charts.   It spreads like a weed, absorbing almost unlimited amounts of capital to fulfill demand within its customer base.   Each year there are maybe 20 companies launched that ultimately have venture scale outcomes. The bar to reach this rarified air is unfathomably high and the reality is the vast majority of founders simply aren’t building for opportunities that have the potential to be one of these generational companies. Many startup founders view VC as the only viable option for capitalizing their business, but not every great business is a venture business, and most successful founders never take VC dollars.  In order to reach an IPO/acquisition large enough to generate venture returns, a startup needs a credible path to $100s of millions in revenue. This is the standard by which early stage opportunities are evaluated. The flip side to this, and I share this feedback often with founders I meet that are building interesting business in non venture markets, if you are able to scale to $10- $20M in revenue that can be a massively successful outcome for a founder.  There are investors who focus on these type outcomes, namely lower middle market PE shops, and the typical path to those deals is a bootstrapped business or a friends/family capital raise.

96

13 Comments

When you're not in the board room, you're always wondering, "What's going on in there?". I have now worked with seven companies where I'd regularly present to a board, a mixture of PE and VC-led, and it's almost always centered around a few key topics. If you're meeting your numbers: - what's your future forecast  - how are you going to continue to grow - how will you grow faster and more efficient  - update on money in the bank and spend If you're not meeting your numbers (along with the things I mentioned above): - what is your plan to turn things around and meet your numbers (this includes new logo, back-to-base sales, and churn reduction) - what resources can they offer to help - do you have the right players in the right seat This is an oversimplification because many nuances are at play, but this is generally it. While board meetings can be stressful, almost every board I've worked with wants to be helpful. Of course, their interest is, first and foremost, that the business is healthy and growing, so there's always that undertone, but overall, they want to help. After all, they are guardians of the investments they make on behalf of others and have to report back on their performance. Think of them like they are CSMs for their investors (the folks that give them money). They need to get a great return on the investment they made on their behalf.

44

6 Comments

🔥 Lenny's Podcast goes IRL: 4 highlights from Lenny's Summit 🔥 Last week's Lenny's Newsletter held its first ever Lenny's Summit of 1,000 product leaders in SF and I was lucky enough to have a front row seat. Don't be fooled by the non-descript name - this was the highest caliber of content, speakers and attendees I have seen across any gathering or conference...ever. Here are my highlights: 💥 *AI and its impact on the product management function is undeniable* and product leaders who are not embracing this will be disintermediated, aka Claire Vo's barn burner "Product Management is Dead 💀 " talk. The product leaders who are curious, adding skills and using AI effectively to lean out of their traditional swim lanes will get more done, more quickly. This next gen of AI-powered product leaders may come from a traditional product, or design or engineering background - but they will be able to delve across all three legs of the classical product-eng-design triad. They will be fast, resourceful and highly competent, thanks to AI. 🛑 Also from Claire Vo, *everyone should create an "Anti-To-Do List" of tasks that should now be automated* to speed up delivery - drafting PRDs, writing updates, meeting notes, collecting and summarizing customer feedback...etc. Here's the thing, it's easy to keep doing things the way we have been doing them because it can feel hard to invest in learning, automation and scaling this kind of change - especially if you work for a big company. But *stop that thinking* and don't wait. If you can't change it for a whole team, keep trying, but in the meantime, do it for your individual work. 💡 Shreyas Doshi shared some deep thoughts about product leadership and some common pitfalls of leaders - indexing too heavy on calendar sucking annual planning vs. using product strategy as a flexible guide, beware of one-way doors masquerading as two-way doors especially at an individual PM level where one needs to show 'impact' and success at each step along the way. Both of these points resonated deeply with me. ⚡ Anthropic CPO Mike Krieger, OpenAI CPO Kevin Weil and investor Sarah Guo were simply giddy about the opportunity ahead in generative AI. I've posted before how Claude offers breakthrough tech for prototyping and this will only continue to be the case. The tooling from these two companies are what is driving the landscape changing opportunity that will allow PMs to delve deeper into the tech stack. 👑 Bravo to Lenny Rachitsky and the organizers on nailing representation of women! Exactly half of the headline speakers were women and it felt like half of the audience too. I ran an informal straw poll during a breakout session and as I suspected, most companies are still struggling with women representation in tech, in particular at the leadership levels. So the speaker lineup was no doubt intention, but also felt natural since the caliber was 💯.

28

2 Comments

We're thrilled to announce that MedScout has closed a $15M Series A funding round led by Fulcrum Equity Partners, with continued support from our existing investors, Stage 2 Capital and LiveOak Ventures. After three and a half years of working closely with over 100 companies, we couldn't be more excited about reaching this milestone. From day one, our vision has been clear. If we built the platform that every medical device sales rep in the field NEEDED to have, everything else would fall into place. This new capital allows us to bring this vision to life in ways we've only dreamed of until now. In our search for the right partner, we wanted to work with a team that deeply understands both healthcare and vertical B2B SaaS. Fulcrum fits the bill perfectly. Having Philip Lewis and Jason Moore in our corner, with their invaluable experience from Stratasan, Florence Healthcare, and other ventures, changes the trajectory for our next phase of growth. Reflecting on the journey so far, I'm so damn grateful. I'm thankful for each of the talented individuals building their careers with MedScout. I fundamentally believe startups are a team sport, and I'm proud of how this team supports each other and our customers every single day. I appreciate all of the companies trusting us with their sales enablement needs and every rep who's taken the time to give us feedback. They've taught us invaluable lessons about commercializing medical devices and what it takes to make an impact within healthcare. The guidance from our board members - Mike Marcantonio, Venu Shamapant, Mandy Cole, and Anubhav Maheshwari - has been incredibly instrumental as we've navigated building a venture-backed company. Finally, I'd be remiss not to acknowledge Parker Chase-Corwin, Mike Boyden, Mike Moore, Lisa Bichsel, Paul M. Edwards, Charlie Whelan, J. Scott Heinzelman, and everyone else who has lent their time and expertise along the way. As we embark on this next chapter, we're committed to pushing the boundaries of what it means to commercialize medical technology. Every advancement we make in our ability to turn complex data into clear insights and powerful tools not only improves sales processes but also helps ensure that life-changing medical innovations reach patients more efficiently and effectively. I'm more excited than ever about this mission and can't wait to see what the future has in store for MedScout. https://lnkd.in/g8xUYzA7

637

130 Comments

I love YC Demo Day season. It’s an insane concentration of driven founders building something they deeply believe in at the frontier of tech. I know it's more trendy for VCs to complain about YC. But I believe Garry Tan when he says 5-10% of companies become worth a billion dollars. Maven’s hit rate from YC is even higher: 16% have had $B+ exits, and we’re trending toward a 40% graduation rate from Seed to Unicorn with investments we’ve made alongside YC. Since Maven’s founding in 2013, we’ve funded 12 YC startups out of the 66 companies we’ve invested in. Here are a few: Cruise: acquired by GM for $1B+ Embark: $4B SPAC, acquired by Applied Intuition Chariot: acquired by Ford before Series A May Mobility: raised $300M+ in follow on funding, including from Toyota Carrot Fertility: raised $100M+ in follow on funding, including from CRV and USVP Daybreak Health: Series A from Lightspeed, Series B from USV Moment Robotics: acquired by Cruise founder Kyle Vogt’s new company, The Bot Co (Maven is an investor) Our strategy differs from other YC investors. Many funds build a YC “index fund”, investing in many startups per batch. It’s not a bad move. But we focus on concentration, meeting all the companies in our thesis area and investing in one or two. Gratefully, I think every company from the list above can point to Maven as one of their most trusted partners that made a difference: intros to customers, closing follow-on funding from top VCs, connecting key hires, and offering genuine care and advice in both the best and toughest of moments. What are we looking for in a YC investment? 1) Team - a technical product team with startup DNA and hustle that can achieve a bold vision. Brilliant, determined founders no one would bet against who are ambitious enough to build an iconic company. 2) Vision worth fighting for - what are you bringing into the world that is worth all the time, effort and money required for success? Why aren’t existing solutions good enough? Are we proud to help bring this idea to the world? 3) Massive market - because of the valuation premium YC demands, even a $B outcome may not return today’s average Seed fund. Honestly, that math sucks. In order to pay the premium, we have to believe that if we’re right, we’ll be wildly successful. 4) Consumer trend - Maven invests in tech companies addressing emerging consumer trends. Even if some investments are B2B or B2B2C, they are always grounded in a consumer insight: autonomous vehicles in 2014, fertility care in 2017, mental health in 2020. Today, we’re looking at consumer applications of AI and frontier consumer health. Many successful companies we fund are outside of YC as well – like Zoom, Hello Heart, Epic!, Class, Wildtype. So we match YC’s Unicorn % across the rest of our portfolio, too 💪 YC founders in consumer tech and digital health: if you want to build an iconic company that delivers a positive impact for millions of consumers - I can’t wait to talk to you!

80

6 Comments

In case you missed it last week, one of my favorite SaaS benchmark reports was released. Thanks to High Alpha and OpenView for the work and having us as a partner! This thing is stuffed full of insights on everything from growth rates, net revenue retention, ARR per FTE, and more. You can't build a great SaaS business without it! https://lnkd.in/ghKT_tBY

33

1 Comment

A lot of great points in a concise clip (not surprising, given the speakers). I’d also clarify that this does not mean “build the entire product before funding.” It means, build *enough* of the product (the MVP) to prove product/market fit. And P/M fit means people are actually using and [in B2B] *spending money* on your product.  It’s a balancing act. Mark makes this point at the 1:36 mark when he says, “Does this matter.” Don’t fall into the "build-it-and-they-will-come” trap. Get early adopters to use it and provide feedback that informs how, and what, you build next along the path to your product vision. https://lnkd.in/gVXtv2hk

20

1 Comment

As an entrepreneur there's no greater reward than seeing customers and the market respond to what you've built. In the words of the inimitable Paul Graham of YC, it validates you're "making something people want." Our leadership rankings from Forrester and G2 highlight Clari's unique market vision, comprehensive platform, process expertise, and extensive ecosystem. The Forrester report also recognized our latest innovations like Clari Studio for flexibility and Clari Copilot with GenAI capabilities, providing virtual assistance and summarization. If you're not a Clari user, reach out and see why we're the go-to enterprise solution for driving predictable revenue and accelerating enterprise growth Download the Forrester Wave here: https://lnkd.in/g_YEYgs4  Check out the full G2 report here: https://lnkd.in/gnBw3APc

28

1 Comment

Great session James Newell and thanks for hosting Jon Prentice and SVB! In terms of the answers and perspective shared from Voyager Capital and James…. The Good (for Seattle investing and VCs) —— * the opportunity in Seattle (and the wider PNW / Cascadia region) that Voyager is still capitalizing on, is that there is a ton of potential in Seed to Series A investing that isn’t as accessible elsewhere. * SF and other markets are saturated and less engaged as investors at this stage. * talent pool here is massive, especially on the engineering and product side. What would be a “Game Changer” for Seattle —— * there is a talent shortage especially in terms of sales and marketers locally. * Few sales and marketers want to do $0 - $1M journey again if prior successful. * Angels are more private here, and may not feel the need to give back to the start up community if that isn’t how they made their wealth Outside of Seattle specific feedback: —— * Founders need to be doers, not “leaders of leaders” (an issue with those coming from big tech); talent need to meet the stage and act accordingly. * AI as a tool and business foundation is only important in terms of delivering business value. * AI powered firms need to show they have an ability to access proprietary data or be linked intimately to workflows or both to be a sound investment [this is established consensus among investors] * Investing, especially very early stage, should be run as a process. Be your own best BDR for fundraising. And finally …. The top 2 pieces of advice most often given to founders…. 1) Try to avoid VC capital to the degree you can [which means you have a capital efficient business]. 2) find a co-founder to complement your skills vs doing it all on your own.

7

As a B2B SaaS VC 👩‍💻 and a huge data nerd 🤓, fewer things bring me more joy than a truly statistically significant analysis (600+ companies surveyed) of B2B SaaS metrics across early stage companies. Great work by our team at Emergence Capital! See comments for full report, and please let us know how we can make this better in the future!

269

15 Comments

I saw a rare example of bad advice from YC recently. They told folks that it doesn’t matter if you’re passionate about your company’s product / mission. While that’s fine from the #VC’s perspective, as lots of enterprise b2b applications are extremely profitable, which was their point. And their business is driven by repeatably successful actions. Growing a b2b business in their wheelhouse, with their network is definitely a successful and repeatable activity. However … most people should not even be an #Entrepreneur. Let alone a founder of a VC-backed startup. The lifestyle will make them miserable. To be a successful #founder, you need to be motivated to get up and work on your company 10+ hours a day, 7 days a week. It’s all-consuming. Usually for an entire decade. So focusing on a product and customers that you don’t care about … that will compuound the personal pain and build a personal hell. I’ve seen that happen to a number of my friends and associates over the years, even when they were seen as tremendous successes. Focus first on what matters the most … your happiness. That includes solving a problem that you’re excited about. But only if you’re actually an entrepreneur. Before you dive into being a business owner…figure out if that lifestyle is for you.

15

5 Comments

Simple, and very clear advice from Harry. This will also drive your focus on the right thing: what should you prove during this funding iteration to be ready for the next one (or default alive so you don’t need more money)

5

As a founder and CEO, I’ve learned that true founder-market fit isn’t just about understanding your industry, it’s about the tenacity to push through when the inevitable challenges hit. Budget freezes, talent moves, customer churn, investor pullback, lost sales, and product or service quality issues are all part of the journey. Startups aren’t linear; the road is bumpy, and you need to be ready to navigate the unexpected. Building startup businesses in any sector is difficult but surviving and thriving in the technology arena is not for the faint of heart. You can have the best product-market fit in the world, but without the grit to keep going when constant change is afoot, key talent departs, or when you lose a big deal you thought was in the bag, it won’t matter. Your deep understanding, experience, expertise and comfort of the market gives you an edge, but it’s the ability to adapt, stay committed and push forward every day that ultimately drives success. Tenacity isn’t just a trait... it’s the backbone of every successful founder. It’s waking up every day, hungry to improve, iterate, and win. A results and outcomes disposition is key. Founders who embrace the uncertainty and keep the faith are the ones who move industries forward.

61

6 Comments

Founders and VCs everywhere should collectively put a bullet in the term “unicorn”. If you sell your company or go public for $1B, then sure, you're a unicorn. Implied valuations based on minority investments? Different story. Don’t count your chickens before they hatch. Operate like your company is worth nothing. Keep your leaders, your board, your team, etc focused on long-term equity value - not your paper valuation today.

257

18 Comments

I wrote two term sheets this week into startups backed by amazing founding teams, and in both cases I recommended a pivot to the team’s initial GTM strategy.   Sometimes being well networked, or building in a white hot problem space can be a gift and a curse when it catches the attention of enterprise customers.   On paper, it is the exact type of validation a funding team is seeking as they work through an initial version of their product, but more often than not it has the potential to derail a startup’s potential for success.   The startups in question were both experiencing this exact dynamic.  In one case, the team had caught the eye of one of the largest robotics companies in the world and begun conversations around a potential partnership.   The second company is backed by a 20 year industry veteran with a deep rolodex of enterprise customers within his ICP.  Some of the largest retailers in the world were engaging in conversations around piloting his product.  As I explained to both of these founders, this was amazing validation, but should also not be the focal point of their initial GTM.   The reality is, in order to successfully deploy within either of these customers, they were looking at a long and arduous path, filled with security reviews and product feature sets that realistically an early stage pre-seed company with 2 founders could not deliver upon.   My advice to them, continue those conversations, with the realization that they could take 1 year+ before realistic deployments, but focus the lion’s share of their GTM energies toward customers with lower deployment hurdles, in this case Series A/B backed robotics companies and $50M-$250M retailers.    To be clear, the  genuine interest from these enterprises is a massively positive indicator on the problem/solution set they are building for, and it is part of the reason we are bullish on the market opportunity of each startup.  I’ve just seen so many startups fail to deploy an initial product and ultimately never raise a seed round because they get stuck in a seemingly never ending enterprise sales cycle.

102

23 Comments