recently rated:

Rated by 27

2.6 2.6 2.8 3.0 2.6

2.7

General Catalyst

 

$$$$$ Cambridge, US East

top rated funds:

Rated by 40

3.9 3.9 3.9 3.7 4.1

3.9

First Round Capital

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 29

3.9 4.2 3.4 3.8 4.3

3.9

RRE Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 20

3.3 4.2 3.9 4.1 3.9

3.9

Leapfrog Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 16

3.8 4.1 3.8 3.3 4.0

3.8

Wellington Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Munich, Europe

Rated by 87

4.7 3.8 3.7 3.2 3.5

3.8

Sequoia Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 24

3.9 3.7 3.8 3.2 3.9

3.7

Altos Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 26

3.4 3.5 3.3 3.9 4.1

3.6

Clearstone Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Santa Monica, US West

Rated by 45

3.8 3.5 3.3 3.4 3.9

3.6

Trinity Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 19

3.2 3.8 4.0 3.7 3.4

3.6

True Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 13

3.8 3.5 3.3 3.6 3.8

3.6

Scale Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Foster City, US West

Rated by 19

3.2 3.5 3.4 3.7 3.7

3.5

Opus Capital

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 20

3.5 3.6 3.6 3.1 3.5

3.5

Union Square Ventures

 

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 15

3.9 3.5 3.6 3.2 3.3

3.5

Morgenthaler Ventures

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 13

4.0 3.1 3.1 3.9 3.1

3.4

The Founders Fund

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 39

3.6 3.6 3.1 3.2 3.4

3.4

Mayfield Fund

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 33

3.4 3.5 2.9 3.5 3.5

3.4

Polaris Venture Partners, L.P.

 

$$$$$ Waltham, US East

Rated by 32

3.4 3.2 3.0 3.3 3.8

3.4

Spark Capital

 

$$$$$ Boston, US East

Rated by 20

3.8 3.5 3.1 3.5 3.2

3.4

Draper Fisher Jurvetson Gotham Ventures

 

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 11

3.9 3.7 2.8 2.7 3.6

3.4

Versant Ventures

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 38

3.5 3.2 3.3 3.1 3.9

3.4

Bessemer Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Larchmont, US East

Rated by 43

3.8 3.3 3.0 3.6 3.4

3.4

New Enterprise Associates

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 38

3.7 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.2

3.3

Draper Fisher Jurvetson

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 40

3.8 3.4 3.0 3.4 3.1

3.3

Menlo Ventures

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 13

4.1 3.5 2.9 3.2 2.9

3.3

Norwest Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 21

3.0 3.1 3.6 3.4 3.4

3.3

Levensohn Venture Partners, LLC

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 16

3.3 3.2 2.9 3.5 3.6

3.3

Sigma Partners

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 33

4.1 3.3 2.9 3.0 3.3

3.3

Greylock Partners

Certified

$$$$$ San Mateo, US West

Rated by 26

3.4 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5

3.3

InterWest Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 11

3.8 3.1 3.5 2.7 3.1

3.2

Insight Venture Partners

 

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 24

3.9 3.5 2.7 2.9 3.1

3.2

Index Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Geneva, Europe

HomeConnectTermsAdviceLettersDiscussLists

Sign-upFor VCsFor MediaFor AdsCEO JobsGet HelpTwitter

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

There is no question that Clearstone is a top tier fund in an under-served market. Word on the street is that they have been trying to close a new fund for too long, and the firm is facing solvency issues.

I have worked at a company with Tom Banahan of Lehman Brothers Venture Capital on the board and would recommend him unreservedly. He is hard working, fair, insightful and helpful - a rare combination in VCs who sit on boards. During the fundraising process, Lehman's diligence process was a little heavyweight, but in the end we picked them as the investor, and it proved to be a good decision. I would gladly have him on the board of my next company.

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

Investors in venture funds, called limited partners, are pulling out or selling their commitments to provide essential capital to the venture model, causing the "Limited Partner Shuffle." Some experts are quoted as saying as much as 10% of all private equity positions will change hands this year in hasty transactions to generate liquidity, including premium positions by top-tier institutions like Harvard. See below:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pi...

What does this mean and why is it relevant to entrepreneurs? A quick overview of venture capital will help to answer these questions.

Venture firms raise money to invest from limited partners (LPs), who are normally endowments, pension funds, insurance companies, and other institutions that manage large amounts of capital. An investment in venture capital is considered a high risk asset class with the potential for high returns. The professional consulting firms that publish guidelines for how limited partners should allocate money across asset classes generally recommend that a small portion go into venture capital, sometimes less than 1%. This small percentage still amounts to many billions of dollars per year being entrusted to venture firms by limited partners, who control trillions of dollars.

Generally speaking, a commitment to invest in a venture fund does not require the limited partner to transfer money until the venture firm makes an investment in a portfolio company. So, a $100 MM venture fund does not have $100 MM sitting in the bank. Instead, as venture firms make successive investments, they collect money from their limited partners and distribute that money to portfolio companies in rounds. To cover operating expenses, the venture firms separately collect approximately 2% of the invested capital as a management fee.

In order to ensure that each limited partner honors their obligation to provide money when needed, which is referred to as a capital call, venture funds implement onerous terms for forfeit or default. The most common default protection is to wipe out any returns from all previous invested capital. This encourages an active secondary market for limited partner positions, since it makes more sense to sell a commitment than to lose the value of the money invested to date.

Fast forward to Q4 2008, and you have the perfect storm of venture capital destruction. First, a relatively large number of limited partners, such as AIG and Lehman Brothers, are facing solvency issues, and they can no longer honor any capital calls to venture capital funds. The large scale dissolution of limited partners is something new.

Second, as the equity and debt markets have collapsed, the allocation of limited partners to venture capital has increased as a percentage. If an LP has $1 billion under management and 1%, or $10 MM, committed to venture capital and if that $1 billion suddenly becomes $500 MM, the allocation schedule of 1% stipulates that the LP now only invest $5 MM into venture capital. Many LPs have charters that strictly govern these percentages, forcing the LP to sell commitments in the secondary market to comply.

Third, many potential buyers in the secondary market have liquidity issues of their own. The purchase of a commitment requires resources to buy the asset, resources to pay for future capital calls, and resources to cover management fees at a time where the future is uncertain. The lack of liquidity and uncertainty has caused a collapse in the secondary market values, with many commitments selling for $.50 on the invested dollar or less. This in turn has encouraged limited partners that might otherwise commit to new positions in venture funds to consider purchasing discounted positions in existing funds.

Lastly, venture capital returns have been hard hit by the downturn, reducing or eliminating the ability of certain funds to get back any of the original invested capital. Portfolio company acquisitions are on hold, and the IPO market is frozen. For many limited partners, investing more money into certain venture firms is literally throwing good money after bad when cash is king.

Most venture firms worldwide are facing problems as a result of this "Limited Partner Shuffle." The best firms are distracted by helping limited partners transfer commitments. Other firms will cease making investments for some period of time, possibly forever. Still other firms will not be able to collect their management fees and go under in the next fews months. Nearly everyone will be fundraising and spending a lot less time with their portfolio companies.

Many entrepreneurs are now pitching firms without a future, wasting invaluable time. These "Walking Dead Funds" are going through the motions until the other shoe drops, forcing them out of business. Other entrepreneurs are counting on investments or participation from funds that have no ability to deliver any capital. Lastly, there are entrepreneurs with soon-to-be-insolvent firms that hold controlling preferred equity positions and Board seats, leaving a potentially deadly vacancy in governance and voting control. How do you sell when your primary shareholder is no longer around to grant approval?

As an entrepreneur in today's market, you need to understand the relative health of the investors that you deal with. Start by asking them directly about their financial resources and the state of their limited partners. Don't hesitate to ask other entrepreneurs and other funds as well. You future may depend on having good information about the solvency of investors that you deal with.

[Please reprint any or all of this post. Entrepreneurs need to know.]

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

Ray brings new meaning to the terms "no holds barred" and "all is fair in love and war." This guy will do anything to win, literally anything. Forget about ethics: he'll slander people in the media, steal intellectual property, take meetings under false pretenses, yank term sheets, invest in competing companies, etc. It may be a game to him, but real people get hurt with this type of behavior and industries face setbacks.

If that were not enough, some limited partners have whispered that his investments at KP have returned zero.

To be within this Ray's sphere of influence in business as either a friend or a foe is dangerous. If you get a meeting at KP and Ruthless Ray shows up, I would recommend that you walk out. You don't need the headache, and entrepreneurs should not support destructive behavior in any investor.

Frontier is a really small fund founded after the last bubble with nice people, but no resolve. They will pull a signed term sheet due to "the economic climate," which makes you wonder if they have the commitment from their limited partners to continue operations.

They probably have next to no money left and are looking for a grand slam home run. Sounds like bad news to me.

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

This fund wants to stick with "Company headquarters in Western PA, Eastern Ohio, or Northern WV"

According to their site, "the Club is fully invested and are not making any new investments. "

They claim to only deal with companies within an hour drive of Philadelphia.

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

They have a good reputation locally being one of the few early-stage funds in our area.

Top 10 for 2008-12-01:

Remaining for 2008-12-01:

EMAIL: INTERMEDIA | RECRUITING: AC LION | PITCH: IdeaCrossing | SERVICES: Inventure | ANGELS: Open-Deals | NETWORK: MeetingWave

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here