Hacker News Reader

Thank you for this. Reading the VC letters was just so amazingly refreshing I can't begin to tell you. I love how they said "no" in almost all the same ways.

I'd really like to know the two that were so standup, that they wouldn't fund a competitor or someone who could, eventually, be a competitor. In all honesty, those are the types of funds you want backing you. They've bought your vision and they're not going to do anything to undercut you.

View on HN

Are you kidding? The "we can't fund a competitor" VCs are just saying "no" like everyone else. There's nothing particularly noble (or ignoble) about it.

In the particular case of Everpix, I'm relatively certain I can guess who these VC funds are and who that competitor is. Given this information, it's not just some empty excuse for a VC to bow out.

It's not uncommon for VCs to have policies of not funding competitive startups, it's in their own interests as well as the startups.

If a VC has funded two competitors it means the startups become reluctant to share information with the VC, the founders of the first startup become unhappy with the VC and follow-on rounds become very messy and cause bad politics.

Certainly it happens (in some cases due to pivots, etc.) but I imagine it's something that most funds would prefer to avoid.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com