Comments on: Wondering Which Partner at a VC Firm to Pitch? TheFunded Now Breaks Out Individual VC Ratings.

By: Founding Member

Founding Member — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:37:08 +0000

Just posted some further thoughts on the partner pages and how to interpret the new partner ratings.

http://www.adeo...-partner-pages/

By: Anthony Kuhn

Anthony Kuhn — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:55:28 +0000

We all already know that self-selected gripe sites tend towards bad data, but the interesting part is when the data reveals outliers on the bell curve. I would use this data, were I a startup seeking VC funding, to target my pitch to the more receptive partners at the review firms. Wouldn’t that be showing the kind of intiative and smart thinking VCs love to see?

By: Vincent

Vincent — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 09:47:51 +0000

Interview with Adeo Ressi, the man behind TheFunded http://uk.intru...d-com_a400.html

By: Founding Member

Founding Member — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:01:15 +0000

@baah-baah-the-black-sheep: If the ratings are meaningless, then how do they so closely correlate to IRR and partners that generate the IRR? Sure, there are exceptions whereby (1) a viscious and self-centered partner can fire management teams and achieve some IRR and (2) whereby a lazy and unintelligent partner can invest in a luck pot of gold, but these exceptions are not the rule.

If anything, TheFunded is showing a DIRECT correlation between how a venture firm treats entreprenurs and how the fund returns. In fact, the new partner ratings is showing that this is also just as true with the individuals as it is with the firms. A great partner can make the firm, the returns, and great companies…

By: baah-baah-the-black-sheep

baah-baah-the-black-sheep — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:50:28 +0000

These ratings are meaningless. They need to be rated by how many companies they bring to success and how many people they screw on the way there.
Who rates them at the moment? Unsuccessful applicants?

By: John

John — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 01:48:22 +0000

If John Hummer is a 1.2 then Mitchell Kertzman must be a 1.0.

By: Founding Member

Founding Member — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:43:09 +0000

@Thomas: The reality is that there is NO information on venture firms outside of self-generated web sites and self-reported return numbers (”IRR”), so any insights into this secretive world by any third party is better than… nothing. While 7,000 CEOs that comprise TheFunded.com Membership may rightfully be considered a “mob,” they are also the best third party available outside of the investors in venture firms (who are also Members of TheFunded.com) to provide the ratings. Just something to think about.

By: dogpants

dogpants — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:14:12 +0000

@1:

if it were “sparce” it would be spelled “sparse”

i think he meant “spare” — as in “barren, not lavish, sparsely-populated”

By: Thomas

Thomas — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:52:39 +0000

This site gives entrepreneurs the illusion of knowledge. A little data can be a dangerous thing. I find it interesting that mob knowledge is afforded such high status considering that the conventional wisdom is usually wrong.

By: Entrepreneur

Entrepreneur — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 21:11:05 +0000

Looks like most of the negative reviews on TheFunded are along the lines of “The VC kicked me out of his office 10 minutes into my pitch!” Maybe your pitch sucked and not the VC?

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:43:13 +0000

I still think entrepreneurs can help themselves out by viewing terms of previous venture capital deals at http://www.pedatacenter.com .

By: Yakov

Yakov — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:42:52 +0000

That’s helpful even more

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:36:33 +0000

Erick – I think you have a typo in the 1st line of the 2nd paragraph (I believe you meant to write “sparce”.

Keep up the great work!