Introducing Initialized Capital
initialized.com
initialized.com
We're engineers and designers and product folks, and most investors aren't still (which is crazy, right?) so we figure if we can do what we're doing while being the investors we wanted when we were founders, that's about as good as it gets.
We've always been pretty sector agnostic, but we're software folks so that's what we know best. A lot of the things we're spending the most time with are "file cabinet" industries — any market where if you walk into the dominant player's office, you see lots of file cabinets or fax machines. A software-enabled startup will probably do a lot in those spaces. What's funny is you can pretty directly extend that to any business that still mainly runs on Microsoft Excel and email too.
Founders matter, but so do markets. We've seen so many of our talented friends end up working on new capabilities that don't solve a specific problem, or don't have a real market. It definitely takes both.
My question: will you follow other investors pattern for whom only warm introductions matter?
I read in the press other SV investors stating that exactly zero investments were made as a consequence of a pitch through the contact email. Will this be true to you as well?
thanks!
In a thread below I talk about file cabinet industries — industries that basically have no software, and are horribly inefficient. Investing is absolutely one of those, but only using email and calendaring. The main bottleneck for investors is number of hours in the day, because there are very few people making all the decisions. Warm intros are the only way a non-software system can work.
So, spoiler alert, software. :-)
This got me thinking... I really do think that better tools for sourcing deal flow are a foundational component of the next age of entrepreneurship. Crowdfunding isn't working as precisely as some have hypothesized. I'd be really curious to see how companies like AngelList & Mattermark are parsing their data to determine correlative attributes of "fundable" companies. Any thoughts/ideas on traction toward successfully automating dealflow?
I'm sure the bigger VCs and accelerators are building interesting things in this space but I haven't found much that's open source.
As data points, AngelList and Crunchbase are good starting places, but the AngelList API is private and the Crunchbase API is paid.
Does that mean that seed stage companies should not bother contacting you unless they can get a warm intro?
Can you discuss what each GP's focus is? Are there certain categories of companies you would handle vs Alexis, etc?
We all help people with their ideas, helping founders manage the difficult psychology of starting something new, and making sure that the startup can get to the next milestone: engagement, growth, and profitability.
Also, great to hear about support for smaller team sizes and investing pre-team as it were, but what's the plan for growth sizes? Pushing for unicorns or some of the portfolio aimed at smaller niches?
Edit: also, used to be a Posterous user, and actually had a product in a similar space which Arrington read out on your TWIST episode :)
We wanna invest in folks early. The fund isn't for investing in B's or C's or later, since there are plenty of people who are good at that.
Cold inbound emails haven't worked well for me, but that's where software down the road should help.
SF/SV is still the most concentrated place for startups, so when you want to grow fast it's still probably the most concentrated place for talent and capital. You can certainly start a company anywhere (and people are, and that's great!), but when you want to grow fast many people still move here, now increasingly at the Series A.
Thanks
Clearly one unique value proposition of your fund is that sweet combination of check amount, time to close, and stage of investment. That's certainly appealing.
But I've learned over time that I care most for my fellow founders in the trenches. I love my people. And with your fund, the people involved – especially those in your portfolio – appears to be a huge draw.
I've had the privilege of interacting with at least a few founders of your portfolio companies and to a person they are all stellar. Fred of Rainforest and Brad and Matt of SendWithUs were all kind enough to come on our fledgling little podcast (thanks again!). And I first spoke to Jarrett of EasyPost as he dove into responding to my support emails; still wear my EasyPost t-shirt all the time!
Some questions that popped into my head while reading:
- One of YC's great strengths is your community of peers. How do you plan to create such a community within your portfolio?
- How strong a hand do you expect to have in guiding your investments? (Trying to get the mental model right of where you'd sit between an AngelList syndicate, a YC, or a full-service firm like a16z.)
- Do you expect to be amenable to alternative exits, for example distributions at some multiple, a la Indie.vc?
- Why are your checks typically in the $500K - $1M range? (Personally not sure my company would need that much capital, so I would like to be careful of being cash rich as much as cash poor.)
Community is of course amazing to have, and very necessary. We've all been to those horrible mixers where everyone runs around talking about how they're KILLIN' IT. Those are huge wastes of time. It's always done through the little things - events, mixers, dinners where smart people hang out and know that they can trust each other and share what's really happening. YC has worked incredibly well because everyone knows that you can trust each other since if you violate that trust, you'll get kicked out of the community. It's something more people should do. Of course since we're later stage, the founders will be spending a lot more time with their teams than with each other.
We're probably in between YC and a16z. We're a smaller fund, so we can't afford as many operating partners and staff, but we'll be able to do a lot. My goal is to spend almost all of my time with the 20 or so companies we work with in a year, so it'll be more concentrated. That's what will be necessary to get companies from seed to Series A, across that dreaded funding gap.
We've always supported founders to make the right choice whether they want to sell, or not. In terms of alternative exits we haven't gotten there yet, because that model is pretty unproven but I really like what Bryce is doing and I really want it to work, because its clear there is a lot of stuff out there that should exist but can struggle to get capital.
Most seed rounds we see come together are between $1M and $3M these days, so that amount of capital lets us get our percentage ownership (which is necessary for portfolio construction) while also letting a good round happen with other good seed investors. Most folks want at least 18 months to 24 months of runway to get to a solid Series A or profitability, so a lot of these numbers work backwards from that.
Thanks again for your questions Josh! Hope we can be helpful to you down the road.
Really hopeful to see Bryce's model work, as well. Am keeping an eye out to see if your fund experiments with similar models.
This is a serious question, I hope it gets read and answered and not down voted into oblivion.
"How does ethics enter into your investment choices? I see you feature Palantir prominently and I have strong feelings about mass government surveillance."
If this is a serious question, maybe don't start with something so aggressive?
Personally I'm anti-surveillance and have been for a long time, particularly the kind of stuff Snowden and others have exposed where there are warrantless wiretaps and long term storage of private citizen information. I've blogged about it many times on my blog. Palantir didn't have anything to do with that and to my knowledge never has.
Initialized doesn't invest in alcohol, tobacco and firearms as a rule because of a mandate from some of our limited partners. Just rationally we believe in funding things that do help people. We generally stay away from investing in directly competing companies and when that does come up (usually through one company pivoting) we make sure that a single partner is assigned to each and those partners are particularly careful to firewall sensitive information. It's similar to what YC and SV Angel have done for years and it works well.
Garry and Alexis are the most founder friendly investors I've ever had the pleasure of working with. Late nights and early mornings in every time zone were normal for them. When I managed Garry's schedule, he held 3-5 hour blocks every single day to talk to founders. Then, in addition, we'd squeeze in as many calls and meetings the schedule would allow to speak with founders who reached out cold asking for general advice. A nightmare logistically sometimes, but a true testament to just how much they care about helping others.
When stereotypes of fund investors are that they are sluggish to make investments, quick and impatient when it comes to vetting teams and products, it is refreshing to see that Garry and co consistently break that view with their founder-first approach.
It might be an understatement for me to say that I'd recommend Initialized to any founder!
They made a decision in 2 minutes.
That's what it's like working with other founders. There's no bullshit. They proactively ask how they can be helpful, are empathetic and understanding when we go through tough times, and push us in a great way.
I'm pretty critical of a lot of Silicon Valley, but we are big fans of Initialized.
When I talk to other founders, I keep hearing how helpful they are. This is one of the most talented and genuine groups of people in the valley.
Congrats on the raise!
So for me, this announcement is bittersweet. Initialized will be great for so many early stage founders, but now I don't have a simple way to book office hours with Garry. Well actually, I bet if I shoot him a message, he'd still be glad to help anytime.
really happy to see this happen. i think this will be great for the community.
A few questions.
1. An obvious question is: Why start out on your own rather than via YC as you've done for a while and seems to have succeeded for you.
2. Would you actively seek investments from outside the United States? As you may well know, emerging markets are gaining a load of attention. In 3 months Nigeria would have hosted Zuckerberg, YCombinator and 500 Startups. (You're always welcome :D)
3. What's the investment thesis of Initialized. Didn't see an Investment Thesis on the website.
Congratulations and all the best!
PS: Not sure if you remember me but you were in the panel that interviewed me for YC in Summer 2014
We have no specific mandate for US-only, and we think startups are absolutely happening everywhere and we want to help them.
An investment thesis at the early stage is really hard to do because we don't know what people are going to start when they're just a few people starting out. E.g. it would have been impossible to write an investment thesis that would include Coinbase early on because nobody was thinking about cryptocurrencies.
Thanks so much for your questions Oo!
So, when we were raising Series A, the negotiations with some new investors were getting a little tenuous. I knew and appreciated that investors are professional negotiators and do this for a living. I on the other hand was a first time CEO. So, for some time during the process, I was feeling a tremendous amount of pressure.
So, one morning I come in to the office feeling sick and questing my ability to withstand the kind of pressure a growing company's CEO has to endure. First thing I see is this short email from Alexis "How's it going? How can we help?". I had talked to Alexis and Garry a few months before about raising a Series A but I was sure that famous people in the valley with full-time jobs had more important things to do than check in on a small, pre-series A company with 10 employees.
I welled up. It was the first time in months that I had felt like someone had my back. In the end we were able to raise a successful A followed by a successful B as well but I still go back and read that 2 sentence email from time to time.
Garry and Alexis are not only awesome investors but wonderful human beings.
Not that big of a deal, though. Interesting VC being product people instead of finance people :)
Garry has been instrumental to the success of my company from the earliest days when we were back in YC W11 through to the present day - I'm so excited for all the new founders who will get an opportunity to work with him as a result of this new fund. Garry is not only an extremely kind person, extremely smart,but also completely understands what it means to have ups and downs as a startup since he's been there and helped hundreds of other companies through those ups and downs. So when you need someone in your corner he's there every step of the way. If you're an early stage founder I couldn't recommend Initialized and Garry more highly - super excited for what Garry and team are going to build.
I first met Alexis in 2011 in Austin, and to this day my wife and I often reference the many different nuggets of wisdom he shared with us. A couple of years later, I met Garry at YC, and his support far exceeded the typical business stuff - we were having a hard time at one point, and his help made all the difference.
What I appreciate the most about people like this group is that they are setting a high bar for everyone who's trying to be a value-adding investor - and people are also stepping up to the plate. The amount of help that my current startup has received from people with no skin in the game is truly remarkable, and people like Garry are the real reason why building a startup in the Valley is easier than anywhere else.
When Esper was changing from an AI assistant company to a calendar analytics company, we went through one of these moments. Some investors were immature frantically trying to find an edge, while some others did everything in their power to help us transition. When things get tough, you realize who has grit.
I remember thinking that Garry was uncannily nice with us during this trying time (to be fair, I've known him since we were both founders and consider him one of my best friends in the bay area). He was always solutions oriented, introducing us to people, thinking through problems and just giving more of his and the Initialized team's time than probably we warranted. The reason why he was that way was because he cares about you (the founders and the team) to tackle a problem you care about. He would always say that when he started investing - "I'm just afraid of being a straight vampire" i.e. an investor who is just leeching off a growing beast.
In a weird way, he's the type of investor, similar to how PG describes great companies - they're kind of like non-profits. They just want to solve problems and it'll work out. That's probably the reason why he's done so well.
Anyway, respect him because he sure as hell respects you.
The effect is amplified because many of the people Garry has helped are part of this community. That includes me personally, not to mention various things he's done for HN itself over the years.
It doesn't matter what I swap out for 'users' in this analogy, I can't make it make sense. It sounds impressive though.
It's like that. You start with bringing your cofounders together. Then you add your first customers. Then maybe you raise a little bit of friends and family money, and that lets you put more money into customer acquisition, which gets you more cofounders, which lets you get more revenue to hire a few more people, and raise more money, and so on.
So startups are like katamari damacy, and if you win, you end up picking up an entire industry.
Unrelated, but did you ever play Nobi Nobi Boy from the same creator?
Initialized was one of our earliest post-YC investors and we've been incredibly happy with their support for us during the many years since YC. We're happy to have them onboard and still talk with the partners quite frequently relative to many of our other investors. I'm excited to see what these guys will accomplish with their new fund!
the age old question comes to mind; how do you value startups with a prototype with little traction. assuming the target market is the size of markets for airbnb,facebook,dropbox, etc.
do you guys follow YC with a fixed rate, (7% for 120K) like 10% for 1M; do you have a min and max for equity and valuation?
Thanks,
We think buying 5% of the company is the right level for a given seed fund. It's enough to be significant to return the fund, but not so much that you're crowding everyone else who you would want in the round. It takes a village to build a great startup and we particularly like to help founders put together a good syndicate of angels and seed funds, all of whom can help with advice, connections, customers, employees and just general support.
It's basically binary whether a company gets to metrics that help it either be profitable or get to a Series A— so that's why at the early stage (all the way to Series A really) most VCs work backwards from percentage ownership. So we write checks of as small as $300K for earlier companies at lower valuation, up to $1M or more for companies later stage.
It's enough to either get to the next milestone, or put together a good round. All of the real work happens after the raise, and it's usually a huge relief to founders to be able to get back to work.
You can really judge investors by how helpful they are during adversity. Through ups and downs, but especially the downs, Garry and Initialized have been the absolute best!
If you're a founder and you have an opportunity to team up with them, do it without hesitation!
I read your farewell letter when you left YC - you hit the nail on head by saying you haven't decided what to do because that would obviate the "founder's perspective". Founders who are going to a known from a known will never know the unknowns faced by a startup.
Everybody I've talked to has raves to say about you. We're solving the problem of paper Checks. People and Businesses are still writing paper Checks. Contrary to popular opinion, Checks moved 5X the money as VISA and MC combined in 2014. We're already seed funded but would love to talk more.
Also, if warm intros are the most effective lead source for deals but most of the YC network is non-black how does that at all address the huge diversity issue thats happening in Silicon Valley that everyone swears they are attempting to fix.
Does Initialized remotely care about this? If so, what are the numbers you can show to prove it?
-Announced in public and on VC website.
-Who you are
-What you look for
-What you offer ($ size and intangibles from partners)
-What track record/prior vintages look like
-How to reach you
Too many VC funds are too opaque or they ask founders to go hunt down a random mutual connection, bother that 3rd person and then circle back to get introduced to the VC.
I like Initialized approach here and wish you a lot of success.
P.S. If nitpicking the website isn't exactly the most impressive looking. Doesn't bother me one bit. KISS. Hope founders look past that too.
Canadian founders, Garry+Alexis are super canuck friendly, some of the best investors we have :)
How would someone make the determination that you are the right firm to pitch to? How would they bend your ear? What's the best way to get your attention? I'm missing a lot of this from your site.
I think the question of sector is really hard for this stage of investment because early on I learned that the best companies to invest in aren't the ones who are hitting some specific buzzword like IoT, etc. Great startups don't work that way — they start with founders going after some specific problem and then later they become trends.
So that's why we think of meeting founders as just "doing the work." We have no choice but to talk to as many people as we can, and then meet them in person when it's useful, novel, or real. Please email me directly — garry@initialized.com.
Fundraising is always the worst, so anything that helps founders get done faster is the right thing.
Curious, have you funded any startups under Init? If I had to guess, "Our Startups" are startups you (Garry / Alexis /et al) personally invested in.
What would be your Ideal investment and are you investing in Food Tech startups?
"We’re founders who are engineers, designers, and product people. "
Unless you're aiming to build the next Unity or game dev/hosting platform, it's unlikely you'll get a Silicon Valley VC to invest in gamedev.
My question -- will VC-funded startups ever enter the realm of the non-wealthy and/or beyond bro's willing to bunk up in a studio apt?