Three of our worst VC stories (twitter.com)

281 points by orgonon ↗ HN
https://xcancel.com/eastdakota/status/2062860530360959273

More of these (via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48418641 below):

https://xcancel.com/gregisenberg/status/2061794787825479818 (<-- the OP)

https://xcancel.com/dunkhippo33/status/2062768969560510486

https://xcancel.com/typesfast/status/2062791307094048937

https://xcancel.com/awxjack/status/2062605286683336757

https://xcancel.com/travisk/status/2062224472426365045

https://xcancel.com/mark_cummins/status/2062293061426663612

27 comments

[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 48.8 ms ] thread
All I ever hear are horror stories. Can someone tell me a good story about VC that isn't Facebook or something?
theres always a story behind the story. wondering why he chose today to say these
#3 is insane, if for no other reason than the VC is signaling that he’s likely going to try and do the same thing to you some day… even if you were totally willing to screw over your team, why would you ever get involved with that VC given you’ll then have to watch your back until the end of time?
These VC stories continue to feed my incredulity at how people _that_ incompetent can still be _that_ wealthy.

Is it the money that makes them stupid or smth?

I could write a book with the horror stories I have of VC and LP behavior, and some of the wild stuff I’ve either been asked to do, verified others were asked to do or say it’s just totally unhinged.

I don’t know if Angel investing groups are really still around like they were in there 2010s but the variance in the types of insanity and weirdness for those groups is really unmatched.

what is the "meeting scheduled on Monday clue"?
Next up, one of our worst CEO stories
A CEO got entire 20 man dev team into boardroom and asked everyone to voice any concerns about technical debt, bad development practices, anti patterns as well as project management issues.

The 4 people who spoke up were all fired on the same day 3 or 4 weeks later. 7 more quit shortly after - as soon as they got any decent offer. 6 months later about a quarter of the 20 were still with the company.

Which CEO?
One that got pushed out by investors, which is good enough for me. No need to name and shame beyond that.
The first I heard of Cloudflare was a recommendation from someone who used to DDoS websites (and yes they've been arrested for related crimes, long story), and I thought "what the heck is Cloudflare" then over the coming years, I kept seeing other friends using it. It's really interesting that Cloudflare was able to pop into a market that Akamai could have snagged for themselves or outright tried to buy out Cloudflare.

It's a bit crazy in hindsight that companies would have avoided investing, considering this is a space someone like Akamai occupied, and clearly there is value in this space. It's incredible to see how Cloudflare has grown over the years, kind of happy they grew as much as they did, a bit surprised by some of those VC nightmare scenarios.

More and more I see why bootstrapping is the way to go. And especially in this SaaSpocalypse with AI companies commoditizing entire companies with new feature releases like Claude Design or Codex for legal, it's better to just run your little corner of the Internet and make sustainable money over hyperscaling with millions and billions and being put out of business the next week.

One might say why bootstrappers won't get erased too but they can carve out a specific market too small for AI companies to want to touch, and still remain sustainable rather than needing to make a ton of money; and pivoting as a venture backed company can be much harder as there are more people to please like investors and your employees which you likely have more of than a bootstrapper.

Did the author edit the tweet/post or am I crazy? There are only two stories
I hear story #1 periodically, but almost never see a quote. How is this stuff said specifically? It always seems like hearsay. I'm sure it's authentic, but I'd love to hear the details on how that stuff is actually said in conversation.
I doubt VCs have different distribution of personal character from other professional groups.

In my experience, a more interesting friction is that VCs are pursuing a diversification strategy while founders are pursing a singleton strategy.

After reading some of these stories, I don't see how you can't come away thinking that psychopathy is a trait that goes hand in hand with being a successful VC. The story about Vinod Khosla speaks for itself, but after reading #2 I clicked on Marc Andreesen's twitter profile, which currently says this:

> You’re not talking to someone who woke up a loser. That loser attitude, that loser premise makes no sense to me.

These fuckers are grotesque caricatures in human skin.

On one hand, every VC who passed on Cloudflare missed out on what is now an $88 billion company. On the other, if they didn't invest because they didn't like the underlying economics, they were actually correct. 17 years after founding, Cloudflare still has never turned a profit.
As bad as these VCs seem to be it's something to see Prince socializing with other bad actors like Maguire while lamenting the bad actors in the space.
What's bad about Maguire?
HN policy is to link to the site. If someone wants to use an archive service they’ll use it, meanwhile most of us want to be able to reply, follow, read etc.
East Dakota is Western Minnesota. This is MAGA country
I once had a VC ask to meet my founders and I for his morning breakfast at a run down diner in texas. So we fly out from Florida pitch deck in hand, and meet him at his booth.

We pull out the deck, he says "Do not need that. How many paying customers do you have?"

Given we were at MVP stage and were running a public sentiment analysis driven social media search engine using our published academic AI work (15 years ago) we said "None yet. The capital to build the paid portion of our product, which is popular, is why we are here."

As he eats his eggs he goes "Come back when you have a hundred or more paying customers" and sent us packing .

Not even a 5 minute interaction with people he asked to fly out to pitch him, and were not even allowed to pitch.

I expect rejection by default at an early stage, but that one was particularly mean.

It will forever remain my go to example of a meeting that could have been an email.

One excited investor we did find for another project ended up being the now famous con man "Michael Prozer" who got on who wants to marry a millionaire using forged bank records and proceeded to get actual capital based on this lie until he was arrested for fraud.

My opinion of VCs is still... recovering. The bar is in hell.

I started a new company with my cofounder 6 months ago. We focused on what people wanted, built a manual solution then automated it. We have 60% margins and a system ready to scale. We are thinking of avoiding investments. I am not sure if we are in a new moment in time where investments are something people do because of what used to be the best to do. And I am not saying avoid blitzscaling but do it without external capital. The hypothesis is that a small team, Claude Code subscriptions, apis and automation/code are enough to make it work via profit reinvested from sales. And it will be actually a competitive advantage because of removed costs, mostly from coordinating a lot of humans and having outside forces pulling in different directions.
This is what I’ve been doing. I’m not even against external funding, I just see it as instrumental to the ultimate goal of building a sustainable business. Venture capital is basically a super high interest loan so it’s only something you want to take when and where it can be effectively deployed.

Most other founders/business owners and investors I know don’t see that as a controversial statement (that it makes no sense to see access to capital through a scarcity mindset, when it is factually accessible) but because most customers or potential employers aren’t one of those, it’s been a problem because this isn’t what you’re “supposed to do” and so they read into it from a social/legitimacy angle.

Regardless, it’s quite rewarding IMO and I highly suggest it to people with the means to pursue that path. I don’t see why people get so worked up on the whole VC thing, at the end of the day it’s just lending. Having dabbled in angel investing on the end you get a lot of people lining up for what they clearly perceive as unsecured loans or a social signal and on the other so many people get caught up in the dynamic of dangling said unsecured loans (when I first started it felt like some of the investors reaching out to me were just doing it to boss me around or something, like sir you can clearly see I started this two months ago and you dm’d me on LinkedIn to chat, I don’t need your money).

IMO most good founders/investors are credibility-maxxing but because of the social dynamics and moral hazards inherent with spending OPM you get weird other behavior

maybe it's the peculiarity of the tech industry to make it seem they're doing something entirely new & different in the world.

how did unproven, fringe ideas get funded before the 1960s ?

you either took a loan, some rich patrons put some money or you were financed by vendor financing. most of these terms were not humiliation rituals. they were built on trust & knowing each other.

the bad & good were funded that way whether merchant expeditions, slavery, colonialism, steam engines.

you didn't have Venture capital. & soon enough venture capital will disappear altogether.