I had to chuckle about the comment in today's Fortune Term Sheet from a VC saying platform teams are BS. With Chatham House rules, we don't know the context behind the hot take, but my guess is whomever said it is secretly jealous they can't offer these kinds of services to their investments. Maybe that's why you believe the "most valuable support is often simply having access to the partners." Entrepreneurs, if you're not going to have access to the partners at a firm, don't take the money. Since capital is still relatively accessible, find a VC that is going to give you their time and money. Some of a VC's time may come from a broader team of experts they've hired to help you out. These platform / value-add services are not a replacement for doing the work yourself, but I don't know any entrepreneurs who would turn down the offer of more hands to help out, or guidance from operator who has "been there, done that." Would love to hear from founders and portfolio companies if you think platform services from your VCs are worthless. https://lnkd.in/gepWTQ2m
Dmitry Bergelson
4mo
Loved your take! And even more - with current far-from-heroic VC returns (as an industry, there are exceptions) , and definitely worse than PE - I believe the whole VC model should be reinvented, and my bet is on "true value creation" (not the kind of "smart money" meaning the partners have money and are smart) - with hands-on contribution to networking/bizdev, next fundraising, talent sourcing and many more. This is how we can make VC deliver really string returns. What do you think?
Fixing what ails consumer businesses
4moLike with most things, this is not a monolith, rather a spectrum. I have had plenty of conversations this year with people looking to leap from startup comms to VC comms, and their impression from the reputation out there about VC comms is that it's difficult to measure - kind of a catch-all role - that is most often thought of as helping with branding for the firm. I have encouraged candidates to place that emphasis third, not first, and to prioritize deal flow first and portfolio support second. The most valuable VC platfomers are actively working on behalf of the companies they support, positioned as a cost savings to businesses the VCs must see inch forward, especially in an era of a push to profitability. Some VC platformers have made this shift, toward dealflow and daily portfolio support, while others stay focused on branding for the firm and some occasional strategic guidance for companies that reach out and ask. My suspicion is that the VC who made that comment has only seen platformers who don't view their primary role as revenue generation for the firm and/or cost savings for existing companies - and they believe they've aged out of doing the daily work and that they haven't been assigned to pursue new business.