Adam Kocik

"“European startups tend to rely much more on public funding sources or traditional bank loans,” Meyers says. “Atomico’s [report] also reports that VC and limited partnership funders all have a decreased appetite for investing in Europe. This suggests that we have more and more small startups in Europe, but they are fighting over a pool of increasingly sceptical investors,” he says." #sifted #startupfunding #startups #vc #venturecapital #funding #publicfunding #investors #investmentstrategies #investmentmanagement #roi #europe #policy #eu

1

At our VC firm, we don't just fund companies, we fund your existential crises. Every investment comes with a complimentary philosophy book. #vc #startups #investment

8

This is great information for founders about valuation multiples! Michael Ho gives a deep dive into the numbers to understand how to think about fundraising and investor expectations, especially as the time between rounds has increased. Thank you for including our venture survey data in such a thoughtful analysis, Michael! Check out the full report on how VCs are investing in 2024: https://bit.ly/3y1eQ3s

21

1 komentář

Why the power law is not so all powerful in VC. Everyone has seen hundreds of takes on why the “power law” should be one of “the investors’ commandments”... Here are my thoughts on why it should not the only way! Disagree? Let me know! https://lnkd.in/eHRzQast

18

3 komentáře

You can looking for early-stage fundraising, what are your best options - price the round or defer valuation with SAFEs? First, let's understand what SAFEs are. A simple agreement for future equity (SAFE) is a financing contract that may be used by a startup company to raise capital in its seed financing rounds. While SAFEs offer flexibility, it's important to consider both pros and cons. Pros: - SAFEs allow founders to raise capital without a fixed valuation, crucial for experimentation. - Attract multiple investors over time, perfect for bootstrapped startups. - Valuation caps and discounts incentivize investors to take a chance on an unproven concept. Cons: - Issuing SAFE2 after SAFE1 can raise red flags for new investors. - Existing SAFE holders experience further dilution with each new issuance, with their entry price still undetermined. - While company valuation might be perceived to be growing, early investors' gains remain capped until a priced round. Regardless of SAFEs or price rounds, it's important for founders to elevate their options. Remember, it's important to communicate new SAFE terms to all investors and maintain trust. Timing is the key. Choose strategically, prioritize transparency, and keep your foot on the gas, but don't let fundraising become your only destination. #startup #venturecapital #fundraising

7

According to a recent Forbes article, early stage VCs fail on 80 % of their ventures. That means only 2 out of 10 investments succeed. Another data point in the article says the top 2% of VCs earn 95% of the profits. So, 98% of the VCs are struggling to earn back what they have invested with 35-40% as venture failure rate. It is imperative that while this model is an accepted norm in the industry, there is enormous scope for improvement and value creation if there is a positive intervention. Considering there is $500 Billion of global investment raised by the VCs, with over 50% raised in America, moving the needle from 20% success rate to 25-30% would be worth tens of billions of dollars of return to the community. This is despite VCs replacing 30%-85% of the entrepreneur with a new CEO within few years of investment.  So, this is surely not working ! The solution lies somewhere else… In my view, based on over 20 years of succeeding and failing with start-ups , the Top 5 reasons for failure among others, are: >      Finding the Product -Market Fit – Failing to find the ideal target market or underestimating the time required to achieve the PMF. >      Building the wrong team – Lack of entrepreneurial and team spirit in early team >      Uncontrolled spending – Spending the money on the wrong priorities.  >      Lack of Focus /GTM plan– Failing to balance short term and long term goals. >      Lack of guidance – Failure to actualise and leverage existing board or advisors. Building a business is a continuous process requiring flexibility, pivoting and building on early success as the founders look for the perfect PMF that could scale with further resources. This requires constant handholding and continued advice from an experienced board or strategic advisors (who are available to help). https://lnkd.in/dj_AsxT7

23

7 komentářů

How to Start Your Own VC Fund https://buff.ly/3zzirGF by @NFX Full Stack VC “The kind of investor that owns the whole process: raising money from LPs, sourcing and winning best deals, supporting founders and helping lead Cos to exit (IPO or M&A) to generate outsized returns!

1

📣 Venture fund managers looking for a fundraising deck that'll impress LPs... Below is an ultimate VC fund deck template you can download and customize from M'idea Hub with tips on making your next fundraising deck more impactful, which slides to include, and how to design your layout best to convey your message and highlight the key numbers. This PowerPoint Template includes: 👉 Over 20 pre-made slide designs with proven layouts 👉 A variety of assets (charts and icons) ⬇ Download here or below: https://lnkd.in/gZEKEdkB #FundraisingDeck #OpenLP #Fundraising

8

2 komentáře

Compare 2 approaches for a corporation: 1. Corporate Venture Capital – investing $500K-5M for up to 5% in a company. Spending $50-100K on due diligence and closing the deal. CVC typically utilizes the technologies for their main business in only 30% of targeted startups. 2. Corporate Venture Client Model – scanning 100 startups with new technologies a year. Paying $1,000 to $100,000 per pilot project. In 100% of cases, you test these new technologies. If these technologies are critical for your company, then you can acquire the company in 5-10% of cases. If you want to move fast and the priority is to help your corporation progress – consider focusing on the venture client model. This reasoning comes from Gregor Gimmy, who initiated this approach at BMW after joining the company in 2012. In 2012, Gregor noted BMW's minimal engagement with startups. He highlighted the vast number of venture-backed startups, noting that out of 50 million new companies annually, about 250,000 receive venture funding. He estimated that around 25,000 of these could be relevant to BMW, representing approximately $50 billion in venture capital. Despite the large number of relevant startups, BMW was only engaging with 3 to 5 per year, leading to what Gregor described as a significant "startup gap" — a big mismatch between potential resources and their utilization. He proposed increasing interactions with startups from 3-5 per year to 50-100. He simplified legal and purchasing processes and launched the BMW Startup Garage in 2015. In 2018, after demonstrating the model's success, he left BMW and launched 27pilots — a firm that helps corporations implement venture client models. In 2023, it was acquired by Deloitte, which was struggling to launch its venture client services. The venture client model allows companies to engage with and utilize startup technologies through pilot projects directly. This direct approach accelerates the integration and practical application of new technologies within the company. The venture client model typically achieves a nearly 100% success rate in engaging startups for technology pilots, compared to the significantly lower engagement rate of CVC. - A disadvantage of the venture client model is that by not investing in or acquiring a startup, competitors might secure exclusive access to critical technologies. However, if a technology is truly critical, a corporation can choose to acquire the startup to ensure exclusive access. View the full episode for additional insights and detailed figures:

115

72 komentářů