Being ghosted can be a frustrating experience, especially for founders seeking investment from venture capitalists.

The feeling is similar to being ghosted in a dating scenario, leaving you wondering what went wrong and whether it was something you did. Questions like “Did the investor dislike my product?” or “Did they not like me personally?” can be overwhelming and drive you crazy.

Ghosting is a clear indication of a lack of interest. If a venture capitalist were interested in investing, they would likely respond to your initial contact or follow up after a pitch.

According to several venture capitalists who spoke with TechCrunch, there are various reasons why a VC might suddenly stop responding after a founder believes they had agreed to a meeting or, worse, after a meeting has taken place.

‘h2 class=”wp-block-heading” id=”h-time”>Time

Mercedes Bent, a partner at Lightspeed Venture Partners, noted in a LinkedIn post that time is a scarce resource for people. As a result, VCs tend to allocate more time to founders and startups that show potential.

Bent explained that writing a thoughtful rejection requires effort, and when a pass won’t lead to an investment, it often gets deprioritized. She acknowledged that this isn’t ideal but emphasized that it’s a reality.

The investing landscape has changed significantly over the past decade, with VCs having to make decisions faster and having less time to respond to prospective founders, Bent added.

“The VC industry has grown rapidly, with more firms, more capital, and more pitches,” she wrote. “This focus on volume and speed leaves little room for the intentionality and personal touch that once defined the industry.”

This rapid growth has created a culture where relationships feel increasingly transactional, Bent noted.

Sheel Mohnot, co-founder and general partner of Better Tomorrow Ventures, admitted that things often fall through the cracks when he’s extremely busy.

“This is never about the founder; it’s always about what else I have going on in my life, like fundraising or preparing for our annual general meeting,” Mohnot told TechCrunch.

Eric Bahn, co-founder and general partner of Hustle Fund, relies on automated email responses to manage the influx of inbound deal opportunities he receives. He estimates that he gets around 30 pitches per day.

“I have a permanent out-of-office email message set up that replies to every message with instructions on how founders can engage with our investment team via our website form,” Bahn explained. “Our team takes every submission seriously, but I just can’t respond to every email solicitation anymore, as much as I’d like to.”

However, Bahn emphasized that if he has already taken a meeting with a founder, he will never ghost them. Instead, he will provide feedback and explain why he’s passing on the deal.

“When I have to pass on a deal, I will explain why I’m passing and share some feedback,” he said. “This is a simple etiquette that I wish more VCs would practice consistently.”

Red flags that will lead to rejection

One investor, who wished to remain anonymous, expressed frustration with AI-generated founder cold outreach, telling TechCrunch: “It’s overwhelming, and I can tell it’s AI-generated because I get dozens of emails with the same structure but different words, and there are always some weird inaccuracies.”

Interestingly, while VCs may be eager to back AI startups, they don’t want to receive AI-generated emails themselves.

“Eventually, we’ll just filter out any email from an unknown sender because it’s likely an AI-generated message,” the investor added. “To meet someone new, you’ll literally need to run into them socially or through a warm introduction.”

Bahn mentioned that a lack of self-awareness is a significant turnoff. For example, claiming that a startup has no competitors or faces no existential risks is a red flag.

During pitches, Bahn often asks founders what could potentially kill their business. He’s surprised by how many founders respond with “nothing.”

“Anyone with basic self-awareness knows that’s not true,” he said. “Many things can threaten a business, such as competitors outperforming, markets facing new regulations, or a new pandemic.”

As a potential investor, Bahn wants to know that founders not only recognize the risks but also have plans to mitigate them. He quoted the legendary CEO of Intel, Andy Grove, who said, “Only the paranoid survive.”

Mohnot noted that if a founder can’t explain how they plan to grow their business beyond the initial concept, it’s a red flag. On the other hand, unrealistic expectations, such as claiming a startup will immediately disrupt an entire industry, are also a turnoff.

Other behaviors that Mohnot finds off-putting include visible tension or lack of complementary skills among founding team members, suggesting potential collaboration issues, as well as a lack of technical depth or an overemphasis on fundraising rather than building a sustainable business.

Rex Salisbury, founder and general partner of Cambrian Ventures and former partner at Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), wants to see that a founder is on top of things. He views a pitch deck with a date in the file name that is six months old as a red flag. Misrepresenting numbers, however, will get a founder cut off from Salisbury altogether.

Founder behavior

There are other behaviors that will end conversations with VCs. For Bahn, if a founder makes a racist or sexist comment, they’re immediately cut off.

“A founder once called a competing founder the c-word in front of me,” Bahn shared. “I have no tolerance for working with someone who has such little respect for other people.”

Founders should keep in mind that even if an investor rejects them initially, they might consider working with them in the future. Being disrespectful when getting turned down can kill any chance of a future partnership and may even lead to the VC never talking to the founder again.

Bahn noted that sometimes his firm provides detailed feedback on a rejection, and the founder will respond by calling them names or even threatening them. He’s noticed that this happens more often to his female colleagues than to himself.

“I’m grateful when those moments happen because it means we made the right choice not to work with that founder,” Bahn told TechCrunch.

“That person is also blacklisted – we will not respond to them again, and the interaction will be recorded in our internal database so that our institution can avoid them forever,” Bahn added.

All the VCs agreed that dishonesty is an instant deal killer. Addie Lerner Katz, founder and managing partner of Avid Ventures, pointed out that dishonesty can take many forms, including exaggerations and a lack of transparency.

She’s also turned off when founders speak negatively about current or past investors or colleagues. Negative reference calls are another cause for concern for Lerner Katz.

“Across each of these areas, we take ‘yellow flags’ very seriously and usually view them as disqualifying,” she told TechCrunch.

Mohnot recalled an incident where a founder lied about a deal with another startup. The other startup happened to be in Mohnot’s portfolio, so a quick text message resolved the issue.

However, lying in general about metrics, team capabilities, market size, or technology performance will often be easily exposed by the VC.

“It happens more often than you think,” Mohnot said.

All the VCs agree that there’s no excuse for not sending a simple “no thank you” follow-up to a founder if they’ve had a pitch meeting. As Bent put it, ghosting happens anyway.

“I’m not saying any of these are good reasons. It’s the reality. It’s the game,” she wrote.

However, given the risks of


Source Link