I wondered originally if it was a small thing, but as I've dug in over month and months, I've noticed it's both a very real thing and a very wide spread thing.
I wondered originally if it was a small thing, but as I've dug in over month and months, I've noticed it's both a very real thing and a very wide spread thing.
Sorry, just to be clear -- is the very real thing the fact that Canadian Funds believe Canadians aren't ambitious enough or is the real thing (in your opinion) that Canadians aren't ambitious enough.
It's a self fulfilling prophecy, there aren't NOT ambitious founders in Canada, it's just "obnoxiously ambitious"* Canadians move to SF.
*(whatever that means, but not said in a negative way, I'd put myself in that bucket, as a Canadian who moved to NYC and built DigitalOcean etc.)
Funny, when I was trying to formulate a theory in my mind I was thinking of the phrase "vicious cycle". I was close enough, I think:)
I'm wondering if it's because Canadians and other countries with similar environments have been conditioned to exercise a different muscle: getting and retaining public funding. The incentive there is to under-promise and deliver/over-deliver, or at least appear to be delivering or over-delivering on paper. It's like that because the public judges are often much less knowledgeable and are forced to judge you on what you said you were going to do on your initial proposal and you're often times forced to start working before any money is deposited in your bank account.
Perhaps Canadians have a similar word? I can't really think of an equivalent in the US, which is perhaps telling.
We don't have a word for it that I'm aware of, but I would say that is at least 40-60% of the undertone I notice. Even when I myself was getting into startup stuff 20+ years ago, I very very very vividly recall my father looking at me and saying with real distain "why do you think you have to be better than everyone else?".
At companies I see something similar I guess, but it's more defeatist than anything else.
I hear this sentence a lot: "We can't compete with X so let's only do Y".
It's the inferiority complex that comes from living so close to America. Companies and individuals that stay here are mostly focused on becoming the best Canadian version of the thing.
The ones who want more just move to America.
The best Canadian companies and founders typical raise from US VCs, full stop. They "escape the ghetto". The US VCs give them better terms, more aggressive, more knowledgable, just overall a higher class of investors. Plus far more choice. At each round I've fundraised, the Canadian VCs were at least 20% lower on important terms like valuation and generally much harder to work with. Yes, there are great Canadian VCs too. But the speed, optimism and 'knowledge of the game' that good US VCs typically bring is much higher.
So what happens? If the best Canadian startups fundraise primarily from US investors, what are Canadian VCs left with? The more conservative, slower growing, less ambitious ones. So the VCs approach that with caution. Which furthers the cycle.
Canadians are more conservative in general, and that conservatism bleeds over into startups and VCs too (not to mention B2B / B2G markets). However, the real issue is that when a company appears to break that stereotype, they just raise from US VCs.
At least this is how it's been for the last 10+ years. Now in the 'new normal' after the frothy period, it's anyone's guess how things will play out. Perhaps the conservatism of Canadian VCs and startups will help them produce more viable long-term businesses in this environment vs. what worked best in the cheap-capital era.
So there's an interesting dynamic change between pre-seed and early seed angel climate and proper serious institutional VCs in Canada.
I've seen the same behavior from freshly minted American millionaires who want to take a swing at this "angel investor" thing due to FOMO.