Guillermo Flor

YC just published the startups they’re looking for this spring. My take: This is no longer about “AI-powered tools.” AI is being pushed to make real decisions, not suggestions. These are the ideas YC believes can define entire categories, through that lens: 1. AI decides what to build and why, instead of humans debating roadmaps. 2. AI makes trading and investment decisions faster than any human team can. 3. AI runs service businesses end-to-end, not just assists consultants. 4. AI manages money movement and compliance, not humans babysitting payments. 5. AI processes government cases and forms without clerks in the loop. 6. AI controls and optimizes industrial operations, not cute dashboards. 7. AI guides physical workers in real time. AI assisted by humans?! https://lnkd.in/dmCyahi6

11

First-time fund managers: Is your startup evaluation expertise secretly undermining your LP fundraising efforts?   Here are three shifts that trip up first-time fund managers:   1. THE NARRATIVE FLIP Startups sell a specific solution to a specific problem. Fund managers sell themselves as consistent decision-makers across dozens of future investments. Your personal brand and judgment are the product.   2. THE TIME HORIZON MISMATCH Startups talk in 18-month milestones. Fund managers need to articulate a 10+ year vision that can weather multiple market cycles. With exit timelines now stretching to 12+ years, this matters more than ever.   3. THE SOCIAL PROOF DIFFERENCE For startups, social proof means customer testimonials and user metrics. For funds, it's about highlighting your network of successful founders, co-investment partnerships with top firms, and relationships with strategic LPs who validate your ability to access quality deals.   Many VCs who've seen thousands of startup pitches still make rookie mistakes when crafting their own fund narrative. They focus too much on their specific investments rather than their repeatable process for finding, winning, and supporting great companies.   👇 See the complete cheat sheet below comparing startup vs. fund pitch decks across 15+ categories. Use it as your roadmap if you're raising a fund, or just to understand how the other side thinks. VCs are you fundraising? Check out Fundingstack for access to 20k+ LPs plus the new Get Intro tool

41

3 Comments

Out of every 100 pitch decks that reach investors, only 2 make it to a second meeting. After years working in accelerators and investment firms, and reviewing 400+ startups, I can tell you from an investor's perspective: the pitch decks that get funded answer 8 critical questions in the right order. If you want your pitch deck to be in that 2%, you can't afford to miss these 8 essential slides: Slide 1���⃣: The Hook (Introduction) Focus: Clarity and Value Proposition. Template: [Company] is the [category] that [outcome] for [ICP]. Goal: Briefly explain what you do, for whom, and what the final result is. Slide 2️⃣: The Problem Focus: Quantifying the Pain. Template: [ICP] loses [$X / Y hours / Z%] because [pain]. Goal: Demonstrate the scale of the problem in terms of money, time, or efficiency to show why it matters. Slide 3️⃣: Solution + Demo Focus: The Product & The "Magic". Template: We built [X]. When [trigger], we [magic]. Goal: Show how the product works and highlight the "aha!" moment where the problem is solved. Slide 4️⃣: Why Now? Focus: Market Timing. Template: Possible because [platform shift / crisis / capability]. Goal: Explain why now is the perfect time. What changed in technology, regulation, or the market to make this viable? Slide 5️⃣: Moat & GTM (Go-To-Market) Focus: Defensibility & Growth. Template: Hard to copy: [X]. Acquire via: [Y]. Goal: Show how you will defend your business against competitors and your specific strategy for acquiring users. Slide 6️⃣: Traction Focus: Proof of Concept. Template: [Metric] growing [rate] since [time]. Proof: [X]. Goal: Prove that people actually want what you’ve built. Growth metrics are the best evidence. Slide 7️⃣: Team Focus: Founder-Market Fit. Template: [Credentials]. Previously [experience]. Goal: Prove that your team has the unique background and skills necessary to win in this specific market. Slide 8️⃣: Vision + Ask Focus: The Big Picture & The Deal. Template: Building [vision]. [Ask]. Goal: Paint a picture of the future scale of the company and state exactly what you need (investment/support) to get there. #StartupFunding #PitchDeck #VentureCapital #Startups #Entrepreneurship #PitchToInvestor #StartupTips #HowToPitch

10

3 Comments

Most founders wait too long to apply to accelerators. The best founders apply early and give themselves multiple shots at momentum. Here are top accelerators currently accepting applications 👇 1. Y Combinator (SF) 💸 $125K for 7% + $375K SAFE ⏳ ~3 months | 🗓 Winter & Summer 🔗 ycombinator.com/apply 2. @LAUNCH Accelerator (SF) 💸 Early-stage funding 🤝 Coaching + investor access ⏳ ~12 weeks | 🔄 Rolling 🔗 launchaccelerator.co 3. Andreessen Horowitz Speedrun (SF) 💰 Up to ~$1M ⏳ 12–16 weeks | 🔄 Rolling 🔗 a16z.com/speedrun 4. HF0 Residency (SF) 🏠 In-person founder residency ⚡ Rapid product building ⏳ 3–6 months | 🔄 Rolling 🔗 hf0.com 5. IndieBio (SF) 🧬 Biotech, climate & deep tech 💸 ~$250K ⏳ ~4 months 🔗 indiebio.co 6. Founder Institute SF|Oak|Seattle|Portland|LV ) 🚀 Idea → traction ⏳ ~14 weeks | 🔄 Rolling 🔗 https://lnkd.in/gr4JAhju 7. Berkeley SkyDeck (Berkeley) 💸 $200K SAFE 🔬 Strong deep-tech ecosystem ⏳ ~6 months 🔗 skydeck.berkeley.edu 8. Funding Breakthrough Lab (Hybrid) 🎯 Fundraising mastery + pitch refinement 🤝 Mentors, mastermind groups & demo ⏳ ~10 weeks | 💰 Non-profit model 🔗 fundingbreakthroughlab.org 9. Pear VC X (SF) 🏢 Pre-seed AI Accelerator 💸 $250K–$2M ⏳ 12 weeks 🔗 https://pear.vc/pearx/ 10. Plug and Play Tech Center (Sunnyvale) 🌍 Global corporate network 🏦 Fintech, health, IoT & more ⏳ ~3 months | 🔄 Rolling 🔗 plugandplaytechcenter.com 11. Conviction Embed (SF) 🤖 AI-focused cohort ☁️ Cloud credits + in-person retreat ⏳ 8–10 weeks 🔗 embed.conviction.com If an accelerator is on your roadmap, this is the window to act. Top cohorts fill fast. Big thanks to Mariane Bekker for the data intelligence ♻️ Repost if founders should spend less time chasing intros—and more time applying to accelerators. ➕ Follow Foundevo- https://www.foundevo.com/ for founder + VC signals 👉 Explore CompareBizTech.com for hands-on AI tools, workflows, and software reviews.

2

YC operates as a network effects business. Each incremental company added to the ecosystem increases the value of the network for all other participants. The excellent Elad Gil identifies three key network effects: 1) Peer-based help --- YC founders tap batch mates for advice, feedback, and learnings, creating an invaluable peer network. 2) Cross-mentoring --- YC provides a mentoring network where founders at different lifecycle stages advise each other. True network effects kick in as more startups distribute throughout the company lifecycle. 3) Customer development --- For B2B companies especially, YC provides an instant testing ground and user base. Early brand-name customers from prior batches provide both product validation and fast revenue. These network effects strengthen more YC entrants, not weaken. When YC scaled from 75 to 250+ companies per batch, critics worried about dilution. The opposite occurred. Larger batches create more companies similar to any given startup, enable specialized programming for different verticals, and increase the potential customer base within the YC network. Perhaps the best modern example - 80% of Y Combinator companies use Brex. Within six years, Brex captured not just YC startups but also 33% of the top 50 VC firms’ portfolios and 25% of all US startups. Therefore, concentration risk actually decreases as YC scales because the ecosystem becomes more valuable to participants. This is the opposite of what traditional concentration risk theory would predict. Of course, we do discount YC-to-YC revenue when evaluating company performance, particularly for startups that show high ARR. But that doesn’t mean that this cash in hand cannot be used to fuel more growth, both within and outside the ecosystem.

11

5 Comments

VC schedules, and thoughts on being a VC noob. -- VC schedules to know -- Most venture capital firms hold partner meetings on Mondays. This is typically when the investment committee votes on new investments and other key decisions. Savvy founders learn the exact timing and may need to provide additional data over the weekend to stay in motion. It is also well known that many venture capitalists observe a “European summer,” with August often being light or fully off. Similarly, the winter holidays reduce activity across much of December. That said, data from Carta shows a meaningful year-end push to close deals in December, followed by a flurry of activity in January. Founders should be cautious about kicking off fundraising during these slower periods. You do not want a raise to go stale and fall apart. VCs talk to each other, the industry is highly interconnected. -- I’m a mid career Noob! -- I am an “emerging manager,” effectively a new VC, less than three years in. In venture capital, the timeline is long. On my Linkedin you'll see I have two roles at Blitzscaling: Limited Partner means I put money into a fund, but have no decision making ability, and General Partner means I'm actively finding startups, bringing them to the partnership, and funding. As a General Partner, you are often considered an emerging manager for close to a decade, as it takes years for a fund to fully mature and establish a VC track record. Investing is a long game, but the upside can be extraordinary. Fortunately, I entered this role with a positive angel track record from my own bank account, which is often a good idea to have as a VC. When I learn a new VC concept or term, I’m an AI first, I’ll link to my post a few days ago in the comments, I totally live for constant growth and learning, if you’re not growing you’re dying. Fun fact: Many/most start their VC career in their 40s, as they need to have enough tech and biz cycles, a broad enough network, resources, and a platform to stand upon. As we end the year, I'm sharing more career thoughts, and productivity thoughts, rather than industry trends and market maps and frameworks and forecasts. I wrote all of this by hand myself, but used AI to edit some of it.

104

17 Comments

Fantastic podcast and insights from Dave Morehead and Harry Stebbings. Gives GPs a real look into how LP decisions are made at a large endowment allocator (Dave is the CIO of Baylor University's Endowment). As someone who worked at one of the pioneers of endowment-style investing at HighVista Strategies (which has deep historical ties with Harvard Business School and the Harvard Endowment), I think all GPs should listen to this. Here are some of the points I resonated with: - Anchor LPs increasingly want more bespoke structures, such as SMAs to manage money, and not just a blind-pool fund. Large institutions have more sophisticated processes and have the right to dictate terms that fit within their risk/return parameters. - Some LPs are facing certain pressures such as decreased enrollment and donations/grants, which push these LPs to target higher-returning asset classes. This is specifically true for the illiquid book, which is a benefit for VC managers. - DPI matters a lot, as do the velocity of return and return of capital. 5x sounds great on paper, but is abysmal if it's over 20 years (~8% IRR). - Do what you said you'd do, or tell them before you change. Investing opportunistically is fine. Changing your mind is fine. But don't keep LPs in the dark. No LP re-ups after they wake up to find the fund whose whole motto was curing cancer is suddenly buying spacetech.

9

4 Comments