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

Firm Rating:

Firm Homepage:

They dutifully investigated our business, then created from scratch an exact copycat of our company, 6 month later. Let me be clear: they did not invest in a competitor, they founded, managed (and funded, obviously) the copy cat!

Lots of Pros

Like any fund, there are a wide variety of different personalities and skill levels represented by the partners and associates. General Catalyst has grown very fast and have some real inexperienced and unproven professionals in their ranks.

I also found that there is a great delta between the hype that they put on themselves and the reality of who they are. They are not "proven entrepreneurs" as they state but rather a rag-tag bunch of spoiled brats, mama's boys, and also rans.

They are however, masters of spin, so if you have a fluffy idea with no substance, this is the firm to take it to.

For the rest of us, run as fast as you can.

Unsolicited and repeated requests to meet and share what we were doing. We politely declined because we were told by numerous and credible sources in Boston that they are shifty, smarmy, and clearly on the prowl for competitive information. We all like to have our ego stroked, but credible VCs rarely contact you blind. They find someone that knows you to facilitate an introduction.

In short, GC's tactics are one step up from the spam mail that claims you've won $10M . . . but only after they ask you for your SS# and some transfer fees.

They cold-called us the day after we were on CNET and a few of the high-profile blogs - eager to get us in their office for a meet and greet. We spoke with them 3 times, did some phone presentations (we're in different states), and they were completely loving it. But they kept on having scheduling conflicts on our avails, and eventually stopped returning emails and calls.

Six months later I find out why - they never had interest, they were just pre-texting us for research. One of their core portfolio companies who only made enterprise hardware & software launched a consumer product that bore a more-than striking resemblance to ours.

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

We pitched our idea to Hemant at GC -- and I don't think we did a great pitch (it was our first pitch to a VC firm) so needless to say we did not get funded. I don't get the feeling that they were ready to act in our space but they are shopping and studying the market - so when they do see something exciting they can move ahead more quickly jump in to the game. This is just being smart as a buyer goes - there were no promises about coming in to pitch them and walking out with a check. By the same token - as we have to be smart buyers of the VC's services we would be bringing in a very long term partner in the early stages of running and building a company so the onus is on both of us to make sure that we sell our company to the right partner and they buy into an idea and company that yields a partnership that is right for them. That is the whole idea of the pitch and I don't think Hemant lead us to believe any differently. The fact that he met us and gave us honest feedback about his concerns over our pitch and company was more helpful than not.

my business was based out of the southeast and in the healthcare space - i interacted primarily with david orfao and hemant taneja. i did interact with their partner group through early diligence. i eventually didn't go with them, not b/c i didn't like them, but b/c i ended up selling the company. my overall impression is that they are indeed professional, and oriented towards the entrepreneur. the fact that the partners have operated businesses in the past is an asset - i've dealt with more than useless vc's who have *not* operated businesses and it was exceedingly painful. so my take-home message is: favorable experience, entrepreneur-focused, and genuine value-add.

I recently had a call with one of the associates and was pleased with the level of respect and insight he provided. While Gautam ultimately passed on moving forward, he followed up with clear and concise reasoning and has made himself available as a sounding board in the future. While I still would hope to work with thier partnership, it was nice for once not to be blown off or mislead.

We made a pitch by phone to a Managing Director, who was very professional, insightful and helpful. Although our opportunity was not a fit for their portfolio, we received helpful feedback and a couple of names of other VCs who look at deals like ours.

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

We pitched to David Orfao a few years back. I got the sense in the meeting they weren't being upfront with me about something. Sure enough, they announced an investment in our competitor within a few weeks.

Money is there but can they bring partners to the table? George Bell has a strong network but unsure of other patrners/principals.
Should also beware of GC researching ideas for their incubation companies.

Met with George Bell and very quickly moved things along. They ended up not investing in us, but I think it was in the end, not a good fit.

We had two phone calls and a presentation. We asked no less than a dozen times if our stage (pre-adoption) or location (not in Boston) were an issue. They kept telling us no and invited us out to pitch to a partner. Two days later we get an email that they are not comfortable investing in an pre-adoption company, particularly one not in Boston. Very very unprofessional and wasted our time.

An associate was supposed to call me to chat before I was scheduled to pitch at their office. The associate blew me off and then called me later to tell me to come into the office. He was supposed to meet me with John Simon.

I was left waiting for 45 minutes in their conference room and when John finally showed up the associate was nowhere to be found. He blew me off again! John then told me that our hour time slot had to be cut to 15 minutes because he was running late. He must have felt that it was alright to keep me waiting but he couldn't do that to his next meeting.

He then low balled me and said that I could probably find other VCs willing to pay me more because they probably didn't have the same quality of deal flow as GC and that they were probably unable to post the kind of returns that GC has posted. I have never met anyone as cocky as him in my entire life.

Life is too short to deal with people like this.

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

It is pretty well known that they brought SideStep in to pick thier brains during thier process of founding kayak. This was something that really was out of line and should be recognized by any entrepreneur with a good business.

They cold called us, and we pitched them last year knowing that they had a portfolio company in our general industry. We just found out yesterday that the portfolio company is launching a product just like ours. They did not really do anything wrong, but it still stings.

George is a great guy and the team are good listeners.

I was contacted by Steve as they were very interested in hearing my pitch. He talked me into coming to their town on my dime. I also spent serious money on a hotel near their expensive offices. When I got the offices for our meeting, Steve and Joel didnt even allow me to pitch, instead bringing me to a couch where they proceeded to railroad me and not hear my plan or vision. Im an expert in both my field and online marketing, and deserved to be treated that way. In fact, if someone flys to see you at your request, spends $200 a night on a hotel, you should have the professionalism to allow them to actually DO their pitch. I wasnt allowed to, and was even belittled while there. Steve never followed up to my follow up email to him. Its very ironic because their website brags about how these guys will be a refreshing experience from how most investors treat enteprenuers. Quite the contrary, they were MY WORST experience of any of the 16 pitches we made accross the country. Beware of these guys, let them pay your airfare and hotel if they are really excited to meet you! They can afford it by the looks of their offices, and they really DONT really care about enteprenuers, as someone who has actually been there and met them.

VISIT OUR SPONSOR: advertise here

Spoke to them last year. They are very smart and ask great questions. I did not get funding, but I did get some very good advice. They are also good at follow-up and making sure they do not leave you hanging.

Has a good track record of bringing in A-list (Redpoint, Sequoia) into deals they help originate. Founding partners are all A players. But hitting growing pains as they get larger -- new partners/principals not as strong and dealflow has gotten very slow.