Aziz Pabani

@PabaniAziz

Building the future of food. Thoughts on startups, how we eat, and Eagles football. Prev: Fintech at Dream, SaaS at Picnic,

SF/LA
Vrijeme pridruživanja: rujan 2014.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @PabaniAziz

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @PabaniAziz

  1. Prikvačeni tweet
    10. pro 2019.

    my thoughts on cooking, food delivery, and where it's all headed

    Poništi
  2. prije 16 sati

    Sports betting- Barstool Sports ($450m acquisition by Penn National). Lead generation for sportsbooks will be invaluable; and this is just the start as still only 21 states have legalized sports betting since the 2018 Supreme Court ruling

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  3. prije 16 sati

    Paid Subscribers- The Athletic ($140m total raised, $500m valuation). ~900k subscribers. Paid media at a consumer level (<$10/mo) is really hard to scale, but if there's one vertical where it can feasibly work, it's sports

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  4. prije 16 sati

    Three different monetization models for 3 separate sports media deals in the last month. In ascending order of attractiveness: Ads- The Ringer, sold to Spotify (~$18m revenue). Helps to have a big podcasting portfolio in 2020

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  5. 3. velj

    21 years as a head coach, 221 wins (6th most all time), 10 head coaches in his coaching tree. And then finally a ring. Just a reminder good things take time (and persistence)

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  6. 3. velj

    Happy for Big Red like my own family

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  7. 3. velj

    Looks like the McNabb pregame talk worked on Mahomes..

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  8. 2. velj

    Ahh Superbowl Sunday. Love the smell of Andy Reid burning timeouts in the morning

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  9. 2. velj

    YOGPO (you only go public once) so there's a powerful perverse incentive (ego + financial windfall) to be the one who takes it there. [Or at the very least sell stakes privately- General Catalyst imo was just the first]

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  10. 2. velj

    Even if you think it's not a great idea and long term bad for your firm, what if all your prudence just gets rewarded with the next generation of partners taking your firm public and you and your retirement percentage watching from the sidelines?

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  11. 2. velj

    All this being said I do believe a bunch of VC firms will go public anyway. Less to do with any of the above reasons and more to do with just basic game theory: The partners who take the firm public are the ones that get the most upside (+legacy) of cashing out.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  12. 2. velj

    This has played out quite a bit in PE with firms sitting on large amounts of dry powder, complaining about valuations, and having to use subscription credit lines just to juice their returns.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  13. 2. velj

    8- Lastly, more money chasing the same deals is a vicious cycle that just keeps making the game harder for everyone involved. More money = higher valuations = more cash for the same percent ownership = lower IRRs

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  14. 2. velj

    And that's the worst alignment of incentives: a VC whose strongest suit is fundraising and comfortably shepherding growing management fees rather than hunting and returning outsized carry is not the one you want to be investing in.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  15. 2. velj

    7- Public markets want steady revenue growth which in PE/VC is largely management fees (thus the focus for public PE firms to keep raising ever larger fund sizes). Mgmt fees matter even more in VC where time to liquidity for investments is generally (and increasingly) much longer

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  16. 2. velj

    But all startups start at the same stage i.e. small so there's only so much capital a young company can ingest, no matter how big a VC's fund size. So you want to write ever larger checks but you're still stuck competing with the same seed or A firms

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  17. 2. velj

    6- Additionally, while the PE to VC comparison seems obvious, PE firms atleast had some pretext for growing larger: You can move upmarket and do bigger deals that very few funds could, thus reducing competition for the deals you were chasing (and deploying more capital per deal)

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  18. 2. velj

    the nominal amount of profit might not that be that large; and it really wouldn't make sense to go public at <$1bn market caps esp with all the added hassles and overhead of going public.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  19. 2. velj

    On the other hand though: 5- For VC firms to go public you need much larger AUMs; even most middle market PE firms are an order of magnitude larger than the average VC firm. So even if a top firm is consistently returning 3x its fund

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  20. 2. velj

    4- (And maybe this is just wishful thinking) but ever greater amounts of money chasing the same deals and the increased public scrutiny might get VCs investing in more diverse founders or traditionally overlooked geographies in a competition to find 'the next big thing'

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  21. 2. velj

    so only makes sense that public markets get some exposure to these mega funds too

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·