Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

That chart and fortune article make a pretty convincing case for the underfunding of female founders. This does mean that the marketplace has provided an opportunity to invest in female founders and achieve significant profits.

They kinda... don't! Unless you assume that female founders are, as a group, statistically identical to male founders in e.g. the industries they're tackling (ex: tech vs. consumer goods). This is a *really* complicated question that's very difficult to discuss critically

Okay, sure women founders may start relatively more consumer companies and fewer high tech and biotech companies. An those consumer companies may require much less capital. But as the article states, its not just transaction size, but total # transactions as well.

You would expect transaction size & # of transactions to trend together in this context. VCs care a lot more about the returns they can expect in a range of plausible best-case scenarios than anything else. There's a lot of overhead. Within reason, larger deals are preferable.

There’s a lot of overhead in what?

Since you decided not to respond, allow me to opine that VC is hands down one of the least overhead heavy industries in existence. I spent 5 years at a quality firm in VC, and switching industries, to quote a favorite film, ‘tis but the work of a moment.

Sorry, didn't see this — overhead is in labor. Maybe it's all a sham and these people aren't worth the enviable salaries they could get elsewhere, but I don't know of a single firm hiring folks who aren't competitive at a national, if not global, level

I don’t understand how that relates to overhead to pursue different opportunities and markets. The best people should be MORE capable of pursuing any opportunity ahead of them, yes?