I think having all this information about vcs aggregated into a site with feedback from those who have walked the same path will be of significant value.

Every industry has its stand-up participants and also those participants whose manner of dealing is not wholly positive. If others are willing to share their experiences with me its more likely that I will have signals about the character of specific firms.

I especially appreciate the founders supporting this venture with the intent of helping others…maybe I can pass on my help to others one day too…

There are dozens of great little funds that get overlooked in the average fundraising process, and there are big funds that get too much credit. Sequoia, for example, started out with a 4.8 rating, dropping to 3.9 based on feedback from entrepreneurs that have dealt with specific partners there (now at 4.1). Sequoia is a well-known and great fund with an excellent track record, but they may not be the easiest to deal with as an entrepreneur.

As a backer of The Funded, I get weekly unsolicited funding interest in my venture-backed business. Who is good? Who is bad? Who should I ignore? Without some research, there is simply no way to know. As the example of Sequoia above shows, sometimes an obvious track record may not be an accurate reflection the day-to-day relationship that I want with my financial partner.

I hope that everyone will review VC’s honestly at every stage to make The Funded a great resource. More than half of the reviews are positive so far, which is a good indication with respect to the selective membership approach. It is NOT designed to be a platform for either evangelization or slander, and obvious incidents will be scrubbed and members banned.

There is no revenue model for The Funded. The site is funded by successful entrepreneurs who want to help others in their shoes, so we will not die or “enter the deadpool.” This I promise, as a funder of The Funded.

All IMHO.

the development is contracted by some one in india and the project is slated to be launched on startups.vc later this year.

The concept is flawed:
– the successful entrepreneurs will not trash VC’s .. even if they had a bad experience.

- The unfunded folks opinion is of little value because 99% of the VC value is AFTER the funding

- Requirements for proving who you are means no one with any credibility will help a useful idea

Total pool of “potential” contributors is less than this blog’s readership.

VC’s will be extinct soon anyway—private equity, bigger angels coming in heavier, and hedge funds coming in with more favorable terms–not the ‘goodfella’ money VC’s have come to enjoy. Corporations are making investments as well–just look at SAP and IBM’s plans for web-based, consumer facing technologies. Institutions who give money to VC’s are finding they can do it on their own as well—see BT’s institutional investment division fro startups….VC’s beat down a startups value and over value their ‘priceless experience’ and advise–

Bottm line, the Top 100 VC’s ddin’t beat the Russell 2000 over the last 3 years—85% of their investments go to crap, and they hope to high heaven the other 15% is a home run—fewer IPO’s make exists difficult—

Time for the Havaad, Cal-Geekly, Stunford, U of Pee MBA’s who can’t get work on Wall Street to find ‘real jobs’—

Raising VC is a complicated process. BOTH parties are evaluating each other and scrutinizing every detail (or should be). It is just like dating and there are a lot of factors, tangible and intangible, that go into whether or not a startup and VC end up consumating a relationship. I think the rating system for something like VC firms is just too simple to really have any significant usefulness, especially because certain information is likely not going to be shared due to privacy concerns. Due diligence when raising VC goes far beyond what you can get from TheFunded. If you’re looking to raise VC, you can probably make an educated decision about a firm by:

- Looking at their history and track record (when were they formed, by whom, how much money they have under management, big hits, big losses, etc.).
- Checking out the bios of their partners and how diverse their team is. How experienced are they? Do they have entrepreneurs who have actually built successful companies before or do they have a bunch of 20 and 30 something MBAs who spent a few years working at a startup or a consulting firm like McKinsey?
- Evaluating their current portfolio companies and how they’re doing.
- Talking with founders, management and/or employees at current and past portfolio companies. If you are in serious discussions with a VC, that VC should be willing to put you in touch with somebody at one of their portfolio companies who would be willing to answer your questions about what the experience has been like.
- Connecting with or retaining an advisor/consultant who knows the VC world and can give you “insider” information about the firm that you may not be able to get if talking with somebody who doesn’t consider you a trusted associate.
- Looking at which other VC firms they have invested alongside.
- Asking them tough questions (i.e. “Give me an example of a recent investment that failed, why you think it failed and what you would do differently.”)

Could TheFunded be a useful tool? Possibly, if it gets critical mass, but there’s a whole lot more due diligence that every startup should be doing anyway that will paint a much better picture. Taking VC, and who you take it from, is one of the most important decisions a startup can make and it can change the entire path and outcome for the company. That said, it’s always wise to remember that VCs are in business to make money and regardless of how great a relationship you have with a VC, if the business goes south, expect that the VC firm will do what’s in its best interest first. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re going to screw you, but it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re going to give you a great deal either. I think TheFunded should be required to post a warning label: “Venture capital may be hazardous to your business and should be used in moderation only when absolutely necessary. This service should be used only by those who have exhausted all other funding options.”

This link below takes you to a great story. The CEO/Founder of this company not only publicly bashed his VC’s but also sued and won.

http://webseitz...rsDigitaLawsuit

999 of 1000 bad deals stay below the radar. The VC’s point fingers at the business model for failure. The CEO/Founders point the finger at the VC controlled board saying they have no clue about their business and that market dynamics are changing while the VC approach stays static.

On a personal level we’ve taken VC money from a few groups. All I’ll say is going with a VC who REALLY understands your business is key. Having a fancy Stanford MBA with two years operational experience as employee #76 of a start up is not the key to success