The qualification you listed means reading this article is like asking a fish, how to fish. (Or asking a person what they want in a romantic partner and then doing that.)
Would you take advice on how to fish, from a fish, or a fisherman?
However, this applies to the qualification you listed. Much more impressive is the fact that Garry has closed the Initialized funds (so he's the fishermen, LP's are the fish). For this reason I think that he can do much, much better than the advice given in this article.
That accomplishment (which I read about) is super impressive - it's a $115M fund!
He knows how he closed it, and he knows that it wasn't by following the rules he's just listed for how to catch some fish. He can do better.
I have to stand by my defense of the comment given very swift and definite negative feedback from other people. By mentioning it explicitly, and that I gave it due consideration, I am showing that I am not being a troll or things like that. I could edit it if I felt it was necessary and considered doing so.
More important than mentioning or not mentioning downvotes is the policy of keeping HN a civil place of discussion, and I take a very extreme position, that I feel is justified in this case. I am a bit angry by being mislead in the past regarding how to pitch, and this article repeats many of those highly misleading tips. It's simply misleading. It won't get you an investment. And Garry can do better. (Assuming he is honest.)
I suppose it is possible that he simply is blind to how he is influenced or makes decisions, even when he uses the same things for his own raising activities, also subconsciously.
> Would you take advice on how to fish, from a fish
I think you were joking here, but holy crap yes I would take fishing advice from a fish (provided it was a human-level intelligent fish that spoke english... which if I'm following your metaphor correctly it is in this case)
More generally the issue with "not asking fish how to fish" is it's the exact opposite of how successful companies treat customers. I ask my customers how they liked the product, what they'd change, how they'd sell it to other customers, etc, etc. That isn't an error. It's one of the most effective business improvement tactics I know of.
This is not to say that the information source is unbiased (customers are much less likely to suggest a price hike for example), or particularly skilled at knowing how to address their needs (they'll ask for a "faster horse" when they mean "gasoline engine" to ruin a quote)... but the fact remains that fish (customers or investors) are the best source of information you have.
>I ask my customers how they liked the product, how they'd sell it to other customers, etc, etc
Are you being literal in the second half of your sentence? I, as well as everyone else, has had loads of companies ask me about my opinion as a consumer. I've never had a company ask me "How would you sell this to someone else"? Have you? Do you actually state that question?
The statement "would you ask a fish, how to fish" comes from the dating world. I was tired of not dating despite doing what my women friends told me they wanted, which is wrong. I'll give a personal anecdote. Women looking for serious relationsihps on dating apps will say they will left-swipe or reject someone with just a picture of their nude upper body without a head. That's not what they want to see, they say.
I followed their advice for a while. Then I ignored their advice, I changed my profile picture to a picture of my nude upper body (I'm male) without my head, and shortly thereafter I had a great girlfriend I was in a monogamous relationsihp with, wherein we both deleted our dating accounts shortly after first meeting.
The fact that women say this is not what they want (when asked what they're looking for from 'pitches') is absolutely irrelevant to how to attract and make them happy. This isn't some kind of meta-commentary on consent or anything like that, I am just saying that it doesn't matter that they told me this is not what they want to see. Because it doesn't matter what they say, it matters what htey do.
It doesn't matter what Garry says, it matters what he does, and no, neither he nor anyone else actually invests on the basis of the points he's enumerated in the article. I point this out by showing what it would take to fail any one of these filters.
Also notice how powerful this comment has just become, after I shared a personal story from the dating world. (At least this is my personal judgment/experience - perhaps you don't find it any more convincing than my more rigorous argument upthread.)
> I've never had a company ask me "How would you sell this to someone else"? Have you? Do you actually state that question?
Yes I absolutely ask that question, and have been asked this question. If you hang out around startups, especially ones using Steve Blank's Customer Development Methodology you'll hear it frequently.
> Also notice how powerful this comment has just become, after I shared a personal story from the dating world
I don't know if I agree with powerful. I will say I'm less optimistic about helping you come to a deeper understanding since, well, it sounds like your mind is made up.
The best I can do is: imagine if you, and 7 billion copies of you, were the only people on this planet. Now picture where the above philosophy gets you in terms of global happiness. Perhaps strategies that emphasize communication would do better?
If there were 7 billion copies of me, then the best thing I could do to find out how to sell to them, is to sell to them. Not the best thing would be to ask them. Even more not the best thing would be just to look inside myself.
Garry didn't even relate how pitches he would have said no to got him to say yes - because they 1, used plain-spoken language, or 2, zoomed out, or 3, had a big future, or 4, knew their numbers, or 5, understood something others didn't.
I mean companies he would have said "no" to but these things made him say yes.
Quite simply, these are not the things that make people say yes.
It's a parody, right? But not exactly: many features there were explicitly requested by users.
market research is good and important. Of course I would ask investors what they're interested in, what they think about something, what they would invest in.
But that is not how you get them to invest, and although Garry does know how to get people to invest, he hasn't put it in this article at all.
I suppose the article can be useful if you read it as, "What a YCombinator partner says they want to see from a pitch." Just don't confuse it for the real advise that will get you funded. This isn't it.
> I suppose the article can be useful if you read it as, "What a YCombinator partner says they want to see from a pitch." Just don't confuse it for the real advise that will get you funded. This isn't it.
I was taking Gary's list as "what to focus on if you're interviewing in two days" (ie quite literally "last minute tips" as indicated by his title). Given more time, I agree you should focus on product, team, and traction.
> Garry didn't even relate how pitches he would have said no to got him to say yes - because they 1, used plain-spoken language, or 2, zoomed out, or 3, had a big future, or 4, knew their numbers, or 5, understood something others didn't.
> I mean companies he would have said "no" to but these things made him say yes.
1. Isn't this asking a fish how to fish? :p (Just pointing out we apparently agree; happy to have you on board)
2. I think a fixation on companies that save it in the 9th inning is misplaced. If you're gong to cargo cult from a survivorship biased sample, you may as well pick a group that didn't start off with an error (so imitating "love at first sight" type companies rather than "won me over in the end" type companies).
I saw this a couple days ago too. I took this as indication you need to interpret customer feedback appropriately, not as indication you should avoid customer feedback.
> But that is not how you get them to invest, and although Garry does know how to get people to invest, he hasn't put it in this article at all.
I'm getting the feeling you think getting investment is about a con-men skillset. That hasn't been my experience. A focus on product, team, and traction is almost surely a better use of your time.
good reply but my last-minute tip is "focus on telling a compelling story" (I know I didn't talk much about what tips I would give, but only objected to the tips he did give.)
you are right that where I say he can do better I am asking a fish about fishing - but when he bagged the LP's for his fund (which is a massive and amazing effort) he played the fisherman (I presume.) so I think he's using the wrong role - he's using his role as a fish to talk about how to get fish, rather than using his role as a fisherman, which he also has recent experience with. It would be a more powerful write-up. the Initialized fund is extremely impressive, and it would be interesting to hear how he closed it (assuming that was his role).
Would you take advice on how to fish, from a fish, or a fisherman?
However, this applies to the qualification you listed. Much more impressive is the fact that Garry has closed the Initialized funds (so he's the fishermen, LP's are the fish). For this reason I think that he can do much, much better than the advice given in this article.
That accomplishment (which I read about) is super impressive - it's a $115M fund!
He knows how he closed it, and he knows that it wasn't by following the rules he's just listed for how to catch some fish. He can do better.
I have to stand by my defense of the comment given very swift and definite negative feedback from other people. By mentioning it explicitly, and that I gave it due consideration, I am showing that I am not being a troll or things like that. I could edit it if I felt it was necessary and considered doing so.
More important than mentioning or not mentioning downvotes is the policy of keeping HN a civil place of discussion, and I take a very extreme position, that I feel is justified in this case. I am a bit angry by being mislead in the past regarding how to pitch, and this article repeats many of those highly misleading tips. It's simply misleading. It won't get you an investment. And Garry can do better. (Assuming he is honest.)
I suppose it is possible that he simply is blind to how he is influenced or makes decisions, even when he uses the same things for his own raising activities, also subconsciously.
The advice in this article is not good. It's bad.