Here's my VC rating system - [ ] yes/no "This investor screwed us over / did something illegal" - [ ] How many days did they take to wire that's it
the problem with VC rating systems is they imply the best investors are the cleanest, easiest, and kindest to work with. a good company has never been made great with a smile and a “congrats on the metrics”. Accountability sucks in the moment.
-
-
-
I think the later half of your first point is the value prop for a lot of growth funds
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Where is this rating system?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Wait what? Can you honestly say “accountability sucks in the moment” is objectively true? It’s completely possible to hold someone accountable and not be an ass about it. Managers do that with employees all the time. Why should VCs be different with governance?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Advice here I've gotten is to alwasy diligence at least one portfolio company that didn't do well. Not as good as systematic evidence, but better than just talking to portcos with logos on the website
- Show replies
-
-
-
Woe to the founder who's motivation/fear comes from VCs
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
quant + qual, sort of like ahttps://twitter.com/JaredSchwitzke/status/1276550818984939520 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
VC's hold entrepreneurs accountable in messy, difficult, unkind ways out of fiduciary duty to LPs (or self interest). If the rating comes from entrepreneurs, it measures entrepreneur satisfaction. Get ratings from LPs if you want a measure of ability to fund/grow "good" companies
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.