John Rikhtegar of RBCx has been dissecting the venture ecosystem with surgeon-level precision lately.
Two of his recent analyses — on GP-LP alignment and VC-backed IPOs — pull back the curtain on where real returns (and misalignments) hide.
Takeaways:
▪️ The Alignment Mirage
→ “Even if you have perfect alignment, it doesn’t guarantee success.”
Small funds look better aligned — lower fees, higher carry exposure — but alignment alone doesn’t produce outperformance. Only 1 in 20 funds (top 5%) actually hit the mythical 3x net. For most LPs, that’s a sobering recalibration.
▪️ Fee Math vs. Fund Math
→ A $50M fund with 2% fees earns $10M in guaranteed income over 10 years.
A $500M fund? $100M.
The large fund could underperform and still make partners rich. That’s the structural irony John highlights — wealth certainty grows as performance risk shrinks.
▪️ The Power Law Follows You
→ “The same power law that defines venture private markets continues after IPO.”
John analyzed 414 North American VC-backed IPOs from 2010–2022.
Result: the top decile averaged +400% after three years.
The bottom 70% traded below IPO price — median return: -57%.
The few still carry the many, even in the public markets.
▪️ Cycles, Not Curves
→ “Venture liquidity is less a sine curve, more a sawtooth wave.”
Half of all exit value in the last decade came from just two years — 2020 and 2021.
Venture isn’t about timing perfection; it’s about vintage discipline — staying in the game long enough for the next liquidity spike.
John’s worldview is empirical, not romantic.
Alignment matters — but selection and structure matter more.
The real alpha sits where incentives, discipline, and data intersect.
Important links:
John's LinkedIn post on Small Fund and Alignment: http://bit.ly/47agoFX
John's LinkedIn post on Power Law post IPO: http://bit.ly/475pAvc
John's LinkedIn profile:
RBCx Ventures: https://www.rbcx.com/
Topics that we discussed:
The headlines on American manufacturing have it wrong.
The story isn’t just about tariffs or reshoring incentives.
The real headline is the trillion-dollar number — the annual investment required to double U.S. manufacturing capacity. That’s more than the GDP of Switzerland.
This is just one of the highlights from my thought-provoking chat with Aidan Madigan-Curtis from Eclipse (Links at the end).
Before Eclipse, she was an executive at Samsara and the manufacturing lead for the Apple Watch— bringing deep expertise in supply chains and what it will take to rebuild U.S. manufacturing.
And here’s another kicker: even if the money shows up, the U.S. is still short 5 million skilled workers. That’s why building projects are delayed not by chips or capital, but by the lack of plumbers, electricians, and technicians.
This isn’t just a finance problem. It’s structural.
▪️ Supply chains span thousands of miles.
▪️ 90% of rare earth magnets are processed in China.
▪️ Chips made here are still packaged and tested overseas.
Without fixing these bottlenecks, new factories risk becoming expensive paperweights.
Two truths can coexist:
▪️ The opportunity is enormous.
▪️ The obstacles are real.
The easy take is to call this push a subsidy bubble. The deeper truth: these dollars are pouring concrete, training workers, and laying the backbone for the next century of energy, defense, and compute.
The better analogy isn’t tariffs — it’s the Bessemer process. When Andrew Carnegie brought it to the U.S., it dropped steel costs 10x and fueled the modern economy.
The question isn’t whether America re-industrializes.
It’s about how the HardTech startup industry can plug into the gaps and achieve stellar outcomes for the U.S. economy.
Checkout the links
Aidan Madigan-Curtis: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aidan-madigan-curtis/
Eclipse: https://eclipse.capital/
Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/
Article 1: What Would It Take to Bring Back U.S. Manufacturing? Part 1: America’s Structural Headwinds. Link –
Article 2: What Would It Take to Bring Back U.S. Manufacturing? Part 2: Making American Manufacturing More Productive
Article 3: The Future of Domestic Manufacturing. Link:
For years, the startup promise was simple:
Join early. Take less salary. Share in the upside.
It sounded like a fair trade — until the fine print appeared.
The real challenge? When paper equity meets real-world tax and timing rules.
With Andrew Endicott of Gilgamesh Ventures, we explored the hidden complexities of startup compensation — and how perception and structure don’t always align.
Founders often share the dream of “owning part of the company.”
But in most cases, employees receive an option to buy shares later — typically with a 90-day exercise window, limited financial visibility, and little immediate liquidity.
It’s not about blame — it’s about design.
And it’s a system that can work better for everyone.
▪️ Optimism ≠ Understanding
Most founders aren’t experts in capitalization tables.
Most employees aren’t trained to interpret preferred-stock structures.
And between those two optimistic groups, value can quietly fade — not in exits, but in expiration dates.
▪️ Liquidity as a Challenge
A strike price isn’t cash. Options can’t easily be financed.
When departing a startup requires paying to keep your shares, the structure itself may need updating.
▪️ A Smarter Equity Model
Andrew’s perspective isn’t about disruption — it’s about refinement.
✅ Extend exercise periods beyond 90 days.
✅ Consider granting stock directly, with companies covering related taxes where feasible.
✅ Redefine ownership as genuine participation, not just potential upside.
Because true equity should reward contribution — transparently and fairly.
Startups aspire to reshape industries.
Perhaps the next evolution is reshaping how they share success with the people who help create it.
Topics covered in the podcast:
(00:00) Episode intro – Rohit introduces TheOnePoint Podcast and guest Andrew Endicott
(01:01) Inside Gilgamesh Ventures – investing in the future of global fintech
(02:48) U.S. and international portfolio – why Latin America is a growth hub
(04:16) Fintech’s comeback and today’s topic: the evolution of employee ownership
(05:02) Understanding startup equity – how tax rules shape employee stock options
(08:23) Why employee stock options don’t always deliver expected value
(11:34) The communication gap – why equity education matters for teams
(16:10) How founders can create clarity and transparency in equity discussions
(18:54) Exercising stock options – timing, financing, and employee planning
(23:05) Rethinking company policy – extending exercise periods and real ownership
(24:51) Exploring common stock models and how tax support can help employees
(31:21) Lessons from leading companies – approaches to long-term employee rewards
(36:39) Key takeaways – building fair and transparent equity structures
Reach out to us:
Andrew Endicott: https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewendicott/
Gilgamesh Ventures: https://www.gilgameshvc.com/
Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/
Who doesn’t love a hustle story? Especially in venture capital.
This one starts in 2009, with Jared Carmel helping a Facebook employee cash out their stock options. Fast forward: he’s now running Manhattan Venture Partners, a $1.5B secondaries powerhouse — ranked top 5 in the U.S.
And here’s the punchline:
Venture’s old playbook — fund startups, wait for the IPO, call it liquidity — is broken.
The real shift? Secondaries.
👉 Companies stay private for 20 years.
👉 Employees can’t wait that long to pay their bills.
👉 Wall Street is piling in, discounts collapsing from 55% to 13%.
This is the biggest structural shift in venture capital history.
As Jared says:
“You can’t have innovation without rewarding the people building it. If public markets won’t do that job anymore—secondaries will.”
🔥 Watch the full episode to see why secondaries aren’t just the future of liquidity… they’re the new foundation of venture capital.
I’ve been waiting for this one.
What do - two decades of startup investing, the European moment, democratisation of venture capital, and growth stage opportunity - have in common?
It’s the VC firm redalpine!
The most interesting thing about European venture right now isn’t just the startups being built. It’s the setup investors are staring at.
On the surface, the story looks familiar: macro noise, cautious LPs, regulation debates. But underneath, the ingredients for one of the strongest vintages in decades are aligning.
Here’s why Michael Sidler (Founding Partner) calls this “the best VC market setup I’ve seen in 20 years”:
(1) Valuation Gap. Public markets are frothy again. Private valuations are still compressed. That gap doesn’t stay open forever.
(2) IPO Window. Klarna’s NYSE debut wasn’t just liquidity—it was a psychological shift. It reminded founders, GPs, and LPs that belief is back.
(3) Capital Flows. Rates are heading down. Liquidity is moving back into risk assets. Public equities already feel priced in. Private equity and venture stand to benefit.
(4) Crisis Vintage Effect. The best VC vintages are often born in rough patches. 2022 was painful; 2025 could be the payoff.
(5) Europe’s Deep Tech Edge. When Princeton gave up on building precision magnets for a fusion plant, German engineers pulled it off. Europe’s strength lies where software meets engineering—and AI is about to amplify that.
(6) Democratization. Redalpine’s Summit Fund is part of a new wave of evergreen, semi-liquid VC products. For LPs and private banks, it’s a way in without the closed-end fund headache. Venture as an asset class is coming of age.
This isn’t a victory lap. Michael’s own words: “It’s like standing in front of the goal. The keeper has slipped. You still have to put the ball in.”
For Michael, venture isn’t just capital—it’s culture. The dot-com scars left European institutions risk-averse. But a new generation of founders (and now LPs) see startups as rock stars, not pity cases. The asset class is coming of age.
And if you care about European tech, this might be the most interesting setup we’ve had in two decades.
Chapters in the podcast:
Connect with us:
Michael Sidler: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sidler/
redalpine: https://www.redalpine.com/
Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/
Ten years ago, investing in US supply chain and manufacturing tech felt like swimming against the tide. Non-consensus, long sales cycles, hardware risk — most VCs stayed away.
Today? We’re in the middle of a reindustrialization moment.
And Jackie DiMonte, co-founder of Grid Capital, explained it better than anyone on my recent podcast:
Reindustrialization isn’t just a policy slogan. It’s the collision of two forces:
Add in geopolitics, the CHIPS Act, COVID supply shocks — and you get momentum that’s reshaping how and where America builds.
The data proves it: new construction spend for manufacturing has tripled since 2020, peaking at $240B before settling near $225B. Even “slowing” looks like an entirely new baseline.
And startups? They’re no longer fringe players.
There are 30x more industrial tech unicorns today than a decade ago.
That means the talent base, the alumni founders, the playbooks — all of it has multiplied.
Jackie’s key advice for founders: don’t chase the big, vague transformation pitch. Anchor yourself in a control point — one measurable ROI use case that proves value in months, not years. That’s how you break through risk aversion and win adoption in industries built on caution.
The vibe has shifted. Industrial tech isn’t the overlooked cousin of SaaS anymore.
It’s where some of the most durable, meaningful companies of the next decade will be built.
We talked about her LinkedIn posts on the reindustrialization topic that continue to gain traction recently
Jackie was a thoughtful guest, and we managed to cover a lot of ground in just 30 minutes. I think you’ll enjoy this conversation as much as I did — links below to listen in!
Connect with us:
Jackie DiMonte: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jdimonte/
Grid Capital: https://www.gridcap.com/
Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/
The most puzzling thing about Blitzhire acquisitions isn’t that they’re expensive.
It’s that they’re deliberately inefficient.
Billions flow through structures that make zero financial sense—unless you’re one of a handful of AI giants racing at breakneck speed.
Here’s the playbook Villi Iltchev unpacked on TheOnePoint Podcast:
▪️ Instead of acquiring the company, buyers pay billions for a non-exclusive license to its IP (exclusive would trigger regulators).
▪️ Then they layer on billion-dollar retention packages for founders and researchers—sometimes valuing a single engineer at $100M.
▪️ Finally, they leave nine-figure sums on the balance sheet so the “shell” company still looks alive to antitrust eyes.
Grossly inefficient? Absolutely. Hundreds of millions get burned in taxes and leakage.
But for the Googles of the world, time matters more than money. They don’t want regulators dragging a deal out for a year while rivals stack AI talent.
Blitzhire is the new acquihire—but only for the top 3–5 labs with trillions at stake. For everyone else, the M&A market remains sluggish, IPOs aren’t “closed” but repriced, and SaaS exits are harder than ever.
It’s corporate Darwinism in slow motion: survival velocity for the giants, stagnation for the rest.
Topics that we covered
(00:00) Episode intro and guest introduction – Villi Iltchev of Category Ventures
(00:48) What is Category Ventures? Fund size, focus, and thesis
(01:54) Why Villi started Category – solving the “subscale VC” problem
(04:46) Category’s ability to lead rounds and bring certainty for founders
(05:49) Emotional side of running a new VC firm in a frothy AI market
(08:28) What is a Blitzhire acquisition? Origins and mechanics explained
(13:48) Structuring Blitzhire deals – IP licenses, retention packages, and keeping shells alive
(16:19) Why Blitzhires are grossly inefficient but deliver speed
(17:10) Will more Blitzhire deals happen? Comparing AI to the mobile war
(20:13) Acquihires then vs Blitzhires now – from $1M per engineer to $100M per researcher
(21:59) The state of IPOs and why pricing, not access, is the issue
(25:30) M&A dynamics: why big buyers prefer large targets, not smaller SaaS firms
(27:15) What’s next for Category Ventures – building brand and reputation over time
Social links
Until recently, “venture capital in India” was shorthand for consumer apps, low-cost data, and billion-user TAM slides. Payments, e-commerce, food delivery. Then came a different kind of story.
In just a few years, it has built four funds and is actively investing across the U.S., Europe, Southeast Asia, and, of course, India — and stitched together a thesis that quietly rewires how Indian talent gets backed. They call it Global Indian Alpha.
On paper, that phrase looks like branding. In practice, it’s a structural edge.
➰ Consider LambdaTest. Seeded when it was just a concept, now $50M+ ARR with an AI-driven pivot executed in six months.
➰ Consider Atoa Payments. Inspired by UPI in India, applied to open banking in the UK, cutting merchant fees in half.
➰ Across the portfolio, 70+ companies spanning India, the US, and Europe.
None of this is about chasing hype cycles. It’s about building a platform that can diligence a founder in San Francisco on Monday and their co-founder in Bangalore on Tuesday — in person, not just on Zoom. Few funds can do that.
The Indian startup story most outsiders know, changing but is still largely domestic: consumer scale, policy tailwinds, IPO windows.
What Leo is showing is the second chapter: India not as a market, but as a global talent engine. 40M diaspora, second only to the US in unicorn founder count, now building cross-border companies from day one.
This isn’t the cliché of “India is the next China.” It’s the less flashy, more durable reality: capital efficiency honed in Bangalore, scaled in Silicon Valley, monetized in London.
Venture capital usually talks in abstractions — “moats,” “founder love,” “operating edge.” What we’re seeing here is rarer: an actual playbook that converts India’s talent diaspora into measurable portfolio outcomes.
The punchline? In venture, as in software, the real narrative inversion doesn’t happen when you shout louder. It happens when you quietly build the muscle others haven’t yet noticed.
Great chatting with Shwetank Verma from Leo Capital.
Two of his quotes stayed with me:
“The more you do this kind of cross-border investing, the more you build that cultural muscle.”
“We felt that there was nobody really playing for this global India play.”
Noah Lichtenstein has a simple but sharp take on venture right now:
Capital is commoditized. Edge comes from operators.
The irony is hard to ignore. Venture used to pride itself on sourcing the next big thing before anyone else. Now? Most funds are chasing the same deals, and the only real differentiator is whether a founder wants you in the room.
Crossover’s bet is that founders want people who’ve been there. The ones who scaled Databricks, Instacart, Perplexity, Lattice. Operators turned investors who act as magnets for the next generation of builders.
But underneath the narrative are some uncomfortable truths Noah calls out:
So where does this head? A few downstream consequences Noah sees:
(1) Specialization beats generalization. Unless you’re Sequoia or Benchmark, the generalist VC is in decline. Right to win now means domain expertise + operating scars.
(2) Data as a filter. With exposure to ~1,000 seed-stage companies, Crossover tracks 120+ data points to find the 10–15% worth leaning into. Signal in the noise becomes survival.
(3) Excellence compounds. Their dinner series brings billion-dollar founders, seed-stage builders, and even pro athletes into the same room. No agenda — just a flywheel of ambition and ideas.
Venture may not be “dead,” but it’s undeniably reshaping. Scale sits at the top, but edge lives at the bottom — with the operators, networks, and small funds that still feel like craft.
Lately, I’ve been thinking about what really drives systemic change in venture — not lofty slogans, but the small, structural choices that compound into outsized impact.
At Alma Angels, a few patterns keep showing up. They look tactical in the moment, but in hindsight, they’re transformative:
▪️ Measure impact in deals, not press.
A traditional syndicate might do 5–15 investments a year. Alma Angels did 68 last year alone. Scale matters.
▪️ Start at the cap table.
Wealth at the early stage is created as a founder or as an investor. If women aren’t in those positions, they’re locked out of the biggest driver of wealth creation.
▪️ Design away bias.
Instead of one syndicate lead deciding, every deal is open to all members. With 550+ angels, bias gets diluted and different kinds of companies get a shot.
▪️ Community is capital.
The biggest value-add isn’t always the largest check. Founders point to Alma angels as the most helpful on their cap table — doors opened, not just money wired.
▪️ Broadening who gets funded compounds returns.
Women-founded businesses deliver 78% ROI vs. 31% for all-male teams. Less capital, more creativity, faster profitability — the math is on their side.
▪️ Play long-term games.
This isn’t about a single round. It’s about building 10,000 angels backing 1,000 companies every year — and generating $1 trillion in women-led wealth by 2050.
The lesson: systemic change doesn’t happen in headlines. It happens in repeated behavior, in how capital is allocated, in who gets the chance to build.
Series A used to be the “first real round.” Today it looks more like the old Series B.
The shift is measurable. Median Series A round size in the U.S. has climbed into the $15–20M range — nearly double a decade ago. Meanwhile, the so-called jumbo Seed ($5–9M) has taken over the slot Series A once occupied. Labels changed, expectations escalated.
What does that mean in practice?
1. ARR thresholds are blurry
The old heuristic — $1M ARR → ready for A — is now dangerous. In crowded spaces, 8–10 companies can all show similar traction. Investors hesitate to pick and instead wait for clearer breakout signals.
2. Decks as filters
Funds see hundreds of decks each month. Overloaded “consulting decks” kill momentum. One idea per slide, ≤15 slides, and a single killer proof point up front (graph, team, or contrarian market insight). The goal isn’t to inform — it’s to qualify.
3. Execution velocity
Follow-on times have compressed. A compelling wedge gets copied in weeks, not years. Founders that raise A’s today typically show:
4. Narrative as segmentation
Investors don’t just need to believe in you — they need a reason you’re different from the other nine credible players. Market segmentation (e.g. auto shops vs. data labelers in AI hiring) turns noise into thesis. Without it, your story blends in.
5. Process math
Expect ~40 investor meetings to close a Series A. Preparation runs ~1 month (story, deck, data room) followed by ~1–2 months of meetings. Underprepared founders rarely get a second chance.
The pattern is clear:
Series A hasn’t vanished — it’s just priced, sized, and judged like yesterday’s Series B.
Glad that Samit Kalra joined and shared all these insights.
As he aptly said - “Execution beats theoretical moats.”
and “It’s just so hard to raise right now that you might as well give it your best shot.”
Samit’s Founder’s Handbook is also a treasure.
Specially the chapter on How to Nail Your Series A Deck - https://1984.vc/docs/founders-handbook/series-a-deck
One of the most surprising “turnaround” stories right now isn’t a brand. It’s a region: Europe.
For decades, Europe played the background track in geopolitics — comfortable under Pax Americana, importing cheap energy, outsourcing security, and letting its industrial base thin out. That era ended the moment Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine.
And suddenly, the continent that perfected managed scarcity is being forced to rediscover risk, scale, and hard power.
Here’s what’s happening:
Defense tech isn’t taboo anymore. A generation of founders who once refused to sell to defense are now asking, “How can we help?”
Series B is a kill zone. Hardware + defense startups can vibe through Seed and A, but by B you’re burning millions per test flight. Patient capital, debt, and government R&D aren’t optional — they’re survival.
Industrial resilience is cool again. Rare earth alternatives, AI-driven factories, logistics automation. The “boring” verticals are now the battlegrounds for sovereignty.
Family offices are back in the spotlight. They’re not just LPs chasing returns. They’re shipping, automotive, and manufacturing dynasties looking for foresight and strategic intelligence.
The bigger story? Venture is no longer apolitical. Every investment is now a bet on sovereignty, resilience, and who gets to write the next chapter of the global economy.
This isn’t just about chasing IRR. It’s about whether Europe chooses to be a buyer of future technologies — or a builder of them.
As Henry Palmer of Lightridge put it: the mission is simple — rebuild capacity to create wealth, and defend democracy.
Not your average VC pitch.
Social Links
Henry Palmer: https://www.linkedin.com/in/henryjpalmer/
Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/
Rethinking Venture Capital Report: https://www.rethink.bigbook.vc/
Key chapters in the podcast discussion
(00:00) Episode intro and context on geopolitics in venture capital
(02:36) What is Lightridge and its mission of industrial resilience & security
(03:29) Why Henry started Lightridge after Amplifier Ventures
(04:20) Differentiating specialist vs. generalist VC funds
(06:30) Portfolio highlights from Amplifier: Terminal, Hive, Isembard
(08:09) The European Ambition Institute and its role in shaping strategy
(09:58) From Pax Americana to a multipolar world: geopolitics reshaping Europe
(17:48) Can Europe achieve technological sovereignty or remain dependent?
(20:18) How family offices view geopolitics, venture, and strategic industries
(24:20) Defense tech in focus: dual-use vs. defense-specific innovations
(28:55) Beyond defense: opportunities in materials, logistics, and advanced manufacturing
(32:27) Misconceptions in defense investing and the “Series B kill zone”
(38:01) What’s next for Lightridge and its mission ahead
For decades, venture capital’s edge came from being in the room.
The right dinners, the right syndicates, the right backchannels.
But are those edges are eroding!?
Companies stay private longer, DPI is suppressed, and capital pools are more crowded than ever. Selection risk is up, liquidity is down, and “alpha” doesn’t look like it used to.
If yesterday’s advantage was network and knowledge arbitrage, today’s may be something different: data arbitrage.
The idea is simple but radical: what if you could reconstruct the invisible graphs behind venture—who co-invests with whom, where talent migrates, which circles spot signal first?
What if benchmarks weren’t generic Cambridge tables, but dynamic peer sets tailored to each segment?
What if diligence cycles compressed from weeks to days, powered by proprietary models fused with LLMs?
At that point, a fund-of-funds is no longer just a fee layer.
It starts to look more like an operating system: allocator, co-investor, and analytics engine in one.
A platform that doesn’t just access networks, but maps them before anyone else walks in the room.
And that raises a deeper question: when networks and judgment can be modeled, does gut feel still rule VC—or are we watching the first serious attempt to systematise private markets bringing it a lot closer to hedge funds?
That’s the bet being made by Level VC and its founder, Albert Azout.
💥 “We want to be the best quantitative investor in the private markets.”
As Albert puts it: “We’re trying to build the most sophisticated data flywheel in private markets.”
And a lot of their tools are available to their portfolio funds and companies - that’s an instant value add.
This is venture reimagined — not by instinct alone, but by infrastructure.
Bonus feature: A rare inside view of their system and how they are mixing tech+AI+data to build a revolutionary platform.
In 2024, India’s startup IPO market was on fire.
Thirteen new-age tech companies — from Swiggy to Ola Electric — went public raising around US$3.4 billion
But 2025 looks different.
As Anoop Menon (Principal at Chiratae Ventures) told me on TheOnePoint Podcast, the IPO engine has shifted gears. Not because of India’s fundamentals — which remain strong — but because founders and boards are asking the harder question: “Are we truly IPO ready?”
Here’s what that readiness really means:
🔹 Predictable revenue & profit trajectories, quarter after quarter
🔹 2–3 quarters of EBITDA-level profitability before listing
🔹 Discipline in forecasts & communication to analysts
🔹 Governance standards that can withstand public market scrutiny
The lesson? IPOs are not just about access to capital. They are about earning public trust.
And in this cycle, we’ll likely see stronger, more resilient ones.
The exciting part? Anoop expects 25–30 new venture-backed IPOs over the next 2 years. And not just consumer names — but fintech infrastructure, consumer tech.
Interestingly, Anoop also shared that more Indian SaaS firms, previously U.S.-domiciled, are flipping back to list in India. Why? Because demand is strong, valuations are fair, and domestic + foreign institutional investors are eager for differentiated tech assets.
🎧 We unpacked the macro factors, institutional pricing pressures, and why some global SaaS companies are even flipping back to India to list here.,
🔥 Excited to announce the launch of TheOnePoint — Sharp Takes.
A new, punchier podcast format that is shorter, sharper, and yet impactful.
And in the first episode, we talk about a touchy and overlooked topic – VC’s legal fees 💸Most startup founders don’t realize they’re paying for something they shouldn’t.
Yet… 99% of VCs still include it.
As Auren Hoffman (GP at Flex Capital) shared with me on the podcast, this isn’t just a small line item.
It can eat up 1–3% of a round and drag out closings by weeks.
👉 Imagine closing a $2M round and watching $50K evaporate straight into opposing counsel’s pocket.
It’s an outdated artifact in term sheets, which is:
🚫 Investor unfriendly (why should other investors subsidize one VC’s lawyer?)
🚫 LP unfriendly (hidden fees eroding returns)
But founders can push back. And some funds (like Flex Capital, etc.) are already proving it’s possible to run deals without burdening the founders.
🎧 We broke down why this clause exists, why it’s toxic for founders and LPs, and what a more founder-friendly future might look like.
And this is just the start — every episode of Sharp Takes will cut through the noise to surface the ideas, perspectives, and shifts that matter most to founders and investors.
Social Links:
Auren Hoffman: https://www.linkedin.com/in/auren/
Flex Capital: https://www.flexcapital.com/
Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/
The Big Book of VC: http://bigbook.vc/
I had a fascinating, in-depth conversation with Cali Chill, Chief Investment Officer at OurCrowd, covering a wide arc of the venture capital landscape — from the democratization of VC and how platforms are opening access to world-class deals, to different types of investors, to the geopolitical forces reshaping investment priorities, and the risks and why investor education is more critical than ever.
We explored portfolio strategy, fund selection, and the unique challenges of running a global investment platform — all through the lens of someone operating at the intersection of capital, innovation, and global markets.
And it’s not just about access — it’s about understanding the quality of that access. We discussed how platforms like OurCrowd have enabled opportunities in different formats and how global networks can support company growth.
Today, OurCrowd has a broad community of over 240K registered users from more than 50 countries who contribute not only capital but also expertise, partnerships, and support for portfolio companies.
The underlying idea we explored is simple: how venture can be opened as an asset class to a wider group while still emphasizing rigorous selection standards.
The VC world is changing — and it’s being rewritten one investor ticket at a time.
Chapters in this podcast:
(00:00) Episode intro and introduction of the Rethinking Venture Capital strategic report.
(01:41) What is OurCrowd, and how does it enable the venture asset class?
(02:48) The ideology behind focusing on building a global network.
(05:11) Global user base, geographic distribution, and portfolio diversity across sectors and stages.
(08:08) Overview of assets, portfolio composition, and creation of index funds like OC50.
(11:08) Portfolio highlights — BioCatch, ThetaRay, and late-stage access deals such as OpenAI and Databricks.
(15:59) Challenges of the platform model — concentration risk, raise variability, and follow-on strengths.
(20:30) Evolution of LP structures and growth of venture democratization platforms.
(23:04) Why democratization matters and how OurCrowd differentiates in terms of quality.
(27:36) Risks and the importance of education.
(29:42) Fund strategy — emerging managers, brand-name funds, and unique sectors like space tech.
(37:47) Geopolitics shaping venture globally.
(45:25) What’s next for OurCrowd — introduction of the Co-Vest product.
So dive into this educational podcast episode to demystify the strategic changes happening in the venture ecosystem.
You may not care about geopolitics, but geopolitics cares about you.
This hit me hard during my conversation with Larsen Jensen – former Navy SEAL, 2X Olympic medalist, and now Founding GP at Harpoon Ventures.
Here's what's happening RIGHT NOW that most are missing:
💡 The Great Awakening: Silicon Valley is returning to its roots. We started with ARPANET, the space race, and Cold War tech. Then we moved on to SaaS and social media. Now we're back to building the hard stuff.
🎯 The Perfect Storm: Three forces are converging:– Founders leaving top tech companies to build hard tech– Government budgets finally prioritizing resilience– Private capital is also filling the void
⚡ Ukraine Changed Everything: This isn't just another conflict - it's "Drone War One." The rules of warfare have been rewritten faster than doctrine can adapt.
🔮 The Generational Opportunity: Larsen believes this AI-driven era will be 10-100x more impactful than the dot-com boom. We're not just building software anymore - we're building the "freedom stack."The companies winning aren't just creating shareholder value - they're ensuring Western superiority for generations.
🎯 What we unpacked:
🔹 Why Harpoon exists: Larsen built Harpoon as a venture fund focused exclusively on technologies that uphold Western resilience — from AI and cyber to space, energy, and autonomous defense. It’s venture capital with a national security thesis.
🔹 The “Freedom Stack” Thesis: AI. Rare earths. Cybersecurity. Energy. Space. Autonomy. This isn’t sci-fi. It’s a new category of venture opportunities that will define global power over the next 25 years. Harpoon calls it the “Freedom Stack” — and they’re investing early.
🔹 From Zero to $1B in Government Contracts: Harpoon doesn’t just provide capital. They go into the trenches with their startups, helping them win massive government contracts. Their portfolio has secured $1B+ in revenue — before IPO or exit.
🔹 The “Black Flag” Program: YC for defense tech? Pretty much. Black Flag is Harpoon’s custom-built accelerator for startups solving “impossible” problems in defense, national security, and critical infrastructure. It’s already showing serious traction.
🔹 The New Venture Equation: You might not care about geopolitics. But geopolitics cares about you. Founders are waking up to this. Capital is following.
Governments are modernizing.
And VCs? The smart ones are moving fast.
The question isn't whether you should care about defense tech, cybersecurity, and critical infrastructure.
The question is: Which side of history do you want to be on?
🚀 From €10M to €1.2B+ — What It Takes to Scale a VC Firm (And What Comes Next)
If you're Speedinvest, you don't just scale — you reinvent.
In our latest episode of TheOnePoint Podcast, I sat down with Daniel Keiper-Knorr, founding partner at Speedinvest. What started as a boutique €10M fund in 2011 has now evolved into a €1.2B+ platform and one of the most active early-stage investors across Europe.
This episode isn’t just about numbers — it’s about how you scale thoughtfully and what's next for venture capital in Europe and beyond.
After publishing our Rethinking Venture Capital report, I’ve been exploring themes that often go unnoticed — and one of them is the venture fund management business itself.
As we enter what we call the Venture 3.0 era, fund management is being shaped by two powerful forces: 📈 Institutionalization and 🌐 DemocratizationIt might not always steal the headlines, but it’s increasingly where the future of venture is being built.
Daniel was the perfect guest to unpack this with. Having lived the full arc — from entrepreneur to investor — he brings rare clarity, sharp intuition on trends, and a candid, approachable voice.
These are the kinds of conversations that remind me why I love this work.
We talked about:
🏗️ The structural strategy behind their growth — from fintech-only in 2011 to now 6 vertical teams covering AI, climate, deep tech, health, and more
🌍 How they built a truly pan-European footprint — and why local presence still matters
🧭 Their intentional shift toward specialized, autonomous sectoral teams
But we also tackled the hard questions most firms avoid:
🔁 What does real succession planning look like in venture?
📉 Why most liquidity plans are broken — and how Speedinvest is using secondaries and other tools like sell-side M&A to unlock real value. Speedinvest now has three full-time team members focused solely on creating liquidity for LPs. Not fundraising. Not portfolio management. Just exits.
🔗 The increasing role of consolidation — and whether Europe will see €10B VC firms emerge in the next five years (Daniel thinks we should)
One venture insight from Daniel, where the industry needs a reset:
💥 “VC is a marketplace — capital in, capital out. But too many GPs still see IR as a burden instead of a core function.”
We wrapped with a strong call to arms:
→ Europe must close its Series B/C capital gap
→ LPs should fund innovation the way they fund infrastructure
→ Founders must know: VC isn’t for everyone — and not every company needs to be a unicorn
This is the playbook for Venture 3.0 — institutional, global, strategic… and deeply human.
Most VCs believe data will transform every industry… except their own.
That contradiction sparked something radical.
Rob Hodgkinson, MD at SignalRank, isn’t just another investor. He’s part of a quiet revolution—one that's rewriting how we pick winners in venture capital.
📈 Instead of betting on founders or decks, they bet on investor track records.
👀 Instead of chasing hype, they eliminate zeros through an algorithm that mimics the logic of hedge funds.
And just like that, a radically new approach to venture capital reveals itself—high precision, low recall investing at Series B.
💸 LPs get index-like exposure with vintage diversification.
🌍 Seed investors get pro-rata access they otherwise couldn't afford.
📈 The SignalRank Index may one day be listed like a public ETF.
It’s a new paradigm.
An entirely different way to be in venture.
The age of artisanal investing is giving way to systematic precision.
And, they have gained ground rapidly.
SignalRank sees 60% of the Series B market and invests in the top 5%.
And in 2 short years, they’ve become the second most active Series B investor globally, right behind a16z.
Ask yourself:
If 50%+ of public assets are indexed… why is venture still hand-crafted?
🚀 This is Venture 3.0. Are you ready?
And this is all that we discussed:
Pro-Rata Rights as an Access Strategy
The Philosophical Divide in Venture: Craft vs. System
Building a Publicly Tradable Venture Product
Scaling Through SPV Infrastructure
Vintage Diversification as a Structural Advantage
and so much more…
If you're a seed investor looking to defend your winners, or an LP tired of inaccessible managers, SignalRank is building the bridge between exclusivity and access.
🚀 Consumer tech is riding the wave. Industrial tech is building the next ocean.
While consumer tech saturates, a trillion-dollar opportunity is hiding in plain sight — and it’s in the factories, warehouses, and robotics labs of Europe.
In my latest episode of TheOnePoint Podcast, I spoke with Sagar Chandna, Senior Partner at Runway FBU — one of the few VCs boldly focused on deep tech and industrial transformation.
** Disclaimer: Transcript is AI-generated. ** Correction: Sagar is among the top 100 data-driven VCs globally.
This isn’t just another startup conversation. This is about:
🔹 Why industrial tech is still a blue ocean — untouched, underserved, and ripe for massive innovation
🔹 How their portfolio startups like WSense (subsea wireless) and Sonair (ultrasound navigation) are quietly revolutionizing robotics
🔹 What the next trillion-dollar companies could look like — and why they won’t be mobile apps
🔹 Why Europe needs to stop depending on legacy supply chains and start building resilient, tech-forward industry
We also go deep on the VC side:💡 What investors really look for in industrial founders💡 Why most founders pitch wrong (and how to fix it)💡 How to create investor trust — the right way
Top takeaways:
❌ Don’t pitch your tech — pitch your company as a VC product
❌ Don’t talk to “any” investor — know your ICP
❌ Don’t be transactional — be strategic and consistent
🔥 Best part? Sagar’s framework for fundraising:
“Regular Updates + Excitement + FOMO = Investment.”
📉 If you think industrial startups are boring or too slow... this conversation might change your mind.
Where you can Sagar:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sagarchandna/Where you can find Rohit:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/Newsletter: https://yadavrohit.substack.com/
