Lots of grizzled VCs in their 40s and 50s will be jealous of Harry Stebbings, who's just raised a $400m third fund off the back of his successful 20VC podcast. The interesting question for CEOs is how much value a tech-industry podcaster can bring as an investor. This is a special case of the general celebrity-investor issue, which I've written about before. I'd say there's three sources of potential value, plus a caution. 1. Network: Anyone who's spent the last decade interviewing luminaries from VC and startups is going to have a good Rolodex. The key network question to ask when evaluating any potential investor is how relevant their contacts are to your current situation. Harry's fund is unusually structured in multiple teams of specialists. Remember, they may open the door, but only you can close the deal. 2. Publicity. I'd be surprised if the fund's deal terms can include promised coverage on the podcast, but you'd certainly expect to get a few positive mentions when the chance arises, plus an in-depth interview once you've revealed how insightful and charming you are. The issue is how valuable PR inside the tech industry is to you. If you sell SaaS or AI to SMEs and funds in the tech space itself, then hugely valuable; the audience *are* your target market. Be a little more cautious if your targets are different. A decade ago, I used to warn startups about what I call the 'Techcrunch spike': the flood of sign-ups you get after the story -- practically none of which convert into revenue, because they're mostly potential competitors checking out whether to compete with you or just copy your best ideas. 3. Smarts. People who have access to lots of smart people, like podcasters, tend to pick up their ideas sooner than those at the industry's periphery. So you can expect some well-informed input and and some new ideas (though most will be put out in the public content). The caution? It's a hell of a lot easier talking about an activity than actually doing it. So practice brings more knowledge than than commentating. I know this from experience; I wrote a Financial Times column about tech startups for a number of years. After talking to lots of people who are now very famous, I started to ask myself 'How hard can it really be?', and decided to found a startup myself. The answer, it turned out, was a hell of a lot harder than I thought. As I discovered over time, I was only an indifferent CEO, and my company's IPO was more due to luck, timing and a great team than to my own skill. Which leads to a general point for startup founders: when famous or top investors give you advice, they'll often seem very confident. That doesn't mean they're always right.
The world has changed and if UK VCs had 100s of household names of unicorns they had backed at seed stage to spin off , it would be a different matter, but quite frankly anyone groundbreaking jumped on a plane to California with anything sensible because of the old boy, pinstripe suit approach to venture funding in London - seen it so manner times as an observer. No hungry startup wants to listen to some old boy banging on about 3 year projections and business plans or investing in certain demographics overnight because they feel they need to not be 'out of touch' which in itself is out of touch. There's a few notable exceptions but in general a slice of modernity and NOT coming from the old boy network is why it's working. If you don't control your own significant media these days or play that game well, which most VCs don't in UK , you can't help a game changing startup business to scale . It's not a 'nice little distraction' compared to "the old proven sensible approach". That clearly hasn't worked for most as we have about 10 'okay' success stories from the past 30 years !
Age has nothing to do with it. Harry just rocks! Period. He’s great at 28 as much as he already was at 20. I know I was lucky to get on his show very early on and he totally blew my mind. Last, but not least, it tells a lot about the power of establishing a media. What he did with 20VC is just second to none. So, $400m on the top of that seems quite an obvious nice to have add on, tbh. Onwards old Jedis. Make space for the young padawan.
When you boil it down, 20VC has cultivated connections with an impressive range of individuals and founders who’ve faced failure, entrepreneurs who’ve achieved significant success, and those who are still navigating their path. This gives them a unique perspective on what works, what doesn’t, why it doesn't and where the bodies are buried. It not just about what you know and who you know, it's what you know about who you know, across a wide variety of industries. 20VC has access to a wealth of insights and experience that they can call upon . They already have the ability to tap into hundreds of years of collective wisdom a phone call away. This powerful combination of knowledge, connections, and real-world experience is what gives the 20VC team their game with the LP's who are seriously astute guys. It’s not just about making investments, it’s about making the right ones, with the most relevant and current information available. Add to that the energy these guys have ,and they become so much more than a VC money source.
Lots of grizzled VCs in their 40s and 50s (and younger ones) could be jealous if not having done a minimum of homework behind this success story and the reasons for its success...the successful ones will applaud the execution and resilience (of course the investment too but there isn't much details behind the investment process), will applaud there is capital ready to be deployed despite what people say and applaud new players with credibility (vs the new ones that thought being a VC is trendy but have no experience or understanding of the business). Lots of people should learn from this story tbh.
My favourite observation since the annocument yesterday has been the posts by 20VC portfolio founders - all sharing the news along with posts of them in their fund branded t shirts. While my sense is that it’s probably a teeny bit orchestrated (and sure, why wouldn’t you! But apologies if I’m wrong), my main takeaway is that their sentiment towards Harry and the fund comes across genuine…which probably suggests they find the value-add of Harry and team very real!
Strategy (be in market, customers, talent, or funding) is critical to success, but the much much harder thing to do is getting execution right, for your specific business at an exact point in time. Capital allocation and resource allocation are distinct skills...and both are equally valuable in today's world. However, brand building is extremely hard to do well, and if that helps you get deal flow to generate alpha at scale which is increasingly tricky in private markets, then I would not underestimate the value of that to LPs many of whom are demanding liquidity, value and growth. VC at the end of the day is a distribution business and digital marketing scales faster than people-led sales.
the grizzled jealous 40 and 50 year olds should accept theyve been outcompeted be grateful for what theyve got be happy a visionary talent like harry exists in the world
The knowledge, deep understanding, and network garnered from those podcasts far surpass what the average VC investor can hope to obtain. Making a startup successful takes immense focus and resilience. The 20VC success is awe-inspiring; the experience and journey in growing the podcast will be invaluable to any startup founder standing at the foot of their mountain, preparing for the long climb ahead…
Where is the experience? I know he has a good track record so far and probably the boldness many European VCs don't. Well deserved and I hope he'll be able to boost the startup economy with this
Founder @ 20VC
1moTotally the wrong question to ask; the right question to ask is what strategic assets have they built around themselves with leverage to help companies scale? The above is wrong. Sorry Tim. 😉