19,907 Members | 29,396 Reviews
6,543 Ratings - 9,238 Comments
13,615 Partners - 29,124 Feedback
I have to agree with the comments of previous posters. I know Larry and he is one of the worst VCs around. He really doesn't belong. He should go back to being a controller or just retire. He had some good luck that made him some money without being good - typical boom tech story of late 90s by being at the right place when someone way overpaid and no value was created, but he was just crunching unrealistic forecast numbers.
This was a bad firm - now it is gone. Typical boom time firm without a real purpose or team. Everyone on Boston knows it.
Nina talks more than any VC I know... and makes no sense.
I have had to roll my eyes many times and hold myself back from laughing..
As an entrepreneur, rejection is a part of the game. A simple "no" is fine, and feedback on why there is a "no" is respected. That is not what happened here. After some runaround, I was referred to meet with an employee straight out of college. This is what PG would refer to as a "dickish move" which would only lead to wasting time. If that was truly respected entrepreneurs, they would give a clear answer instead of playing games. Therefore I give you a heads up so that you can avoid wasting your time.
Private: 137 Chars
My company is outside the core of Leapfrog Ventures and normally I would not approach such a VC. However, I was attracted by having two principals who are entrepreneurs and MIT engineers. ie I felt these partners are the type that truly earned their stripes and they are not some green finance geeks who could not manage the local 7-11 yet acts like he is God's gift to Venture Financing (you know the type I am describing). I was pleasantly surprised to get a quick response indicating that this was outside their core (which of course I already knew). However, knowing my company is outside their core, I thought that would be a good place to practice the pitch and ask some feedback. I was pleasantly surprised that Peter agreed to meet me for an hour and listen to the pitch and provide feedback. Within about 24 hours of initial contact, I met Peter in Menlo Park. He listened to the pitch attentively and provided some great feedback on the pitch, on the story, on what is missing. He provided some suggestions on addressing the (internal) questions that a VC would have listening to the pitch that I needed to proactively address. Most VC's don't even offer any feedback and Pete not only offered feedback but also provided some coaching and good advice. Truly you can tell that he is a class act. To top it all, he took the time to do this in mid December when everyone is usually really pressed for time. Bottom line, this is a super classy VC and I would highly recommend Leapfrog
Private: 51 Chars
While introduced to Aydin, I met with Sundeep. Out of 100+ VC conversations I've had, he was literally the absolute worst. Arrogant and disrespectful. Talked a LOT more than he listened. And in our one hour meeting came across as if he was trying to prove he's the smartest guy in the room. His behavior was especially strange because he had very little domain expertise in our area, yet rather than listening, was espousing strong opinions. In summary, the guy came across like a total clown. Really reflects poorly on Aydin personally, who seems to have a great reputation. If someone can figure out why he's on the team, I'd love to know, if only to understand how Aydin made the decision to hire him.
My company just pitched to dozens in VCs in the valley. We received substantial backing from numerous establish VCs.
Looking back, my worst experience was with Euan at Kholsa. He was very late to the meeting, and he had to leave early too. In addition, he spent the entire meeting on his cell phone, occasionally looking up to murmur off things about Kholsa's rigid theses. He went on and on about how we didn't send him our deck ahead of time.
At least he gave us a curt pass email after the meeting -- and another forced request for us to send over our full deck.
I've spoken with many other credible startups that have pitched to Euan / Kholsa. It sounds like this is a pattern. Under no circumstances will we ever take money from these guys. Also, I hear that Vinod is a holy terror.
When started first to discuss with Intel Capital, I was skeptical. Concerns about being "too corporate", "difficult to negotiate with and close" etc were some inputs I received.
I was pleasantly surprised.
The Director assigned to us was top notch. He got the business and opportunity quickly and was able to connect with appropriate parties in Intel Corporate quickly to get feedback and assess possible business synergy.
Negotiation was professional, reasonable and timely. No "playing games" or "corporate stuff". Main somewhat unique requirement was an Observer seat on the board, which was ok with us.
Deal terms were fair. From several term sheets provided by other firms, Intel's was not the best but above the median.
We ended up closing with them on the round - due to combination of the individual director assigned, the fair terms and the brand/strategic value (which was important to our security related business).
A year+ into the relationship, ongoing work with the Intel rep is very well. We received several good introductions to Intel business partners for business development as well as multiple strong referrals to executive candidates for positions we were looking for. Reasonable oversight via board observer seat as well as very good sounding board as we discuss strategy.
Overall - very happy with the decision to partner with Intel Capital.
Private: 95 Chars
How would we know which VCs to pitch once we have a proof-of-concept in Storage and/or Networking?
Mitch gives a first impression of being a polished and informed professional. He's really a quick flip guy who's constantly meddling in operations.
He's rumored to be transferring his work to Bill Gurley.
Private: 111 Chars