1) VCs are looking for startups that can get to $100m / yr in rev by yr 7-10.

VCs need this kind of return in order to produce great funds.
2) And so many companies won't get to this level - and that's not a bad thing - but then it means you should be thinking about trying to get going w company revenue since you can't count on VC backing.
3) someone asked about age and fundraising & do accelerators help?

Age doesn't matter. But just make sure no one is taking advantage of you. And as such, accelerators can help sometimes w that guidance.
4) Someone got a rejection because he had a teddy bear in his room (side note: what investor says that?!?)

Mac says he's been there and has heard that saltiness. But you're going to get a lot of nos. And you gain more leverage w more progress and traction. So just keeping going.
5) Someone is being told by pitch competitions that she is too early or too late. (this "Goldilocks & the 3 bears issue" is one of the biggest problems in the industry IMO) Everyone has a different def of what "early" means...

Mac recommends networking w the pitch organizers.
6) Next q is about derisking customers before building out the product.

I'm not sure if it's clubhouse or my internet but I didn't quite catch any of this part.
7) Advertisement for @RarebreedVC - if anyone wants to be an LP, they are open to more investors - go to
their website!

Fwiw, I'm a (small) LP and highly recommend checking it out.
8) Advertisement for past @HustleFundVC venture fellow @jasminvests - she is going to HBS in a couple of years and is in process of becoming a VC scout. (If you are looking for scouts or even want to hire her away, I highly recommend her!)
9) Someone asked about raising $$ for a travel startup

I missed most of the responses but I think the tl;Dr was that the founder should think about other travel mkts that are here - like road travel. And keep pitching!
10) Aspiring VC asked for advice.

Mac's go-to is honesty. He is direct and upfront w/ a founder. (And I concur!)

Not all vcs do this though.
11) I missed the q (sorry am apparently a horrible transcriber!)

But if you want to work w Mac, send him honest updates w a cadence. Don't just sugarcoat news. Establish rapport. Be genuine - treat him like a person. He is not a walking checkbook.
Ok it's midnight on the east coast, so the conversation is now over.

Sorry for the poor transcription job - between the audio dropping in and out and certain offspring stalling on bedtime, I probably only caught 70% of it. Next time!!

More from Elizabeth Yin

More from Internet

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x