One of the things that VC-mentors of mine recommended when we first started Hustle Fund was to start thinking about succession planning now. That sounded crazy at the time, because who thinks about generational planning when they’re first starting a company?
But having now seen a lot of longstanding VC firms go through transitions, I understand why. It just takes a really long time to find the perfect partner and convince said partner to join you and stay with you. It takes time to transition knowledge-sharing, culture, and in essence, the whole business to that set of new partners. That process can take a decade or more for each new partner.
So even as far back as day 1 – as an emerging fund manager – we have actually been looking for our first non-co-founder Partner. And 8 years later, I am so excited to announce the promotion of my colleague Haley Bryant!
Haley has somewhat of an unusual background, which is what I think is a strength of hers in coming to Hustle Fund. Like everyone else on the team, she has entrepreneurial experience – this is a requirement at Hustle Fund. However, her beginnings were not in software. She initially thought she wanted to be a journalist upon graduating from UVA, and she ended up starting her career in a retail store at Apple. From there, she rose very quickly to senior management, running stores that were generating $100 million or more per year in revenue. She later parlayed that management experience into software startups. Most recently, she was the COO of Animalz, which is a SaaS marketing agency and helped them get from near zero to 8-figures of revenue per year. Her operational experience has been extremely helpful to our startups who are going through a growth phase and are struggling with reigning in chaos. Haley has the unique ability to quickly make things more efficient with a combination of tech, people, and processes.
I first met Haley years ago on Flow Club. (Flow Club is a great platform to get work done and is a portfolio company.) She was leading a Flow Club session I attended and she kept everyone on track with their goals. I was wondering, who is this awesome executive? I have to meet her!
Fast forward, she joined our Angel Squad, and I knew that we absolutely needed to work with her. We managed to somehow convince her to get involved with us part-time on the side with our Angel Squad. She and Brian Nichols (GM of Angel Squad) worked so well together in growing Angel Squad in those early days.
Eventually we convinced her to join the investment team. Fast forward to today – Haley has proven to have tremendous taste in deals and already has a number of fast growth companies that she has invested in. She is probably one of the most “value-add” investors I know – she is always willing to roll up her sleeves anytime. She not only helps troubleshoot her own companies, but also hops in and helps the entire portfolio. She truly is a founder-friendly VC. She is such a go-getter and has so much energy. Even after burning the midnight oil, she’s up early the next day to either teach or cycle fast in a spin class. She’s that kind of person. She’s helped us with our fundraises – even from day one when most principals typically do not want to get involved in these types of processes. She is so eager to learn, so fast to learn, and is one of the most efficient people I know in getting work done. Lest you think Haley is a robot, she is also incredibly kind and thoughtful.
TeamLab with the investment team
With this promotion, Haley has set the bar high. I could not be more excited about Haley’s leadership and the future of Hustle Fund.
Please join me in congratulating Haley Bryant, and I hope you get to know her as well!
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
Four years ago, we launched our global angel investor community called Angel Squad. It was a bit of an experiment. When we first started, our goal was simple: break down the barriers that have traditionally kept most people out of angel investing – education, check size, dealflow, and networks. Our ambitious goal was to mint 10,000 new angel investors over the course of Angel Squad’s life.
That sounded like a tough goal back then, but today I’m incredibly excited to announce we’ve officially crossed 10,000 Angel Squad applications across 50+ countries!
Beyond Silicon Valley’s Model
Our journey to 10,000 applications reveals there’s an enormous appetite for angel investing globally. We’ve seen Squad applications from engineers in Bangalore, teachers in Buenos Aires, and entrepreneurs in Lagos — proving that great investment potential isn’t confined to Sand Hill Road.
You don’t need to be in a traditional tech hub to be a meaningful startup investor. Our 10,000 applications have come from every point in the globe — small towns in Latin America, the emerging MENA market, and regions historically left out of the startup funding conversation.
One of our members, a professional chef in Turkey, joined the Squad after attending one of our online workshops. Another, a commercial pilot based in Australia, saw our community’s global presence as a way to meet and support local entrepreneurs in the cities he flies to. These stories of global impact aren’t exceptions; they’re becoming the new norm.
Small Checks, Big Impact
When I wrote about our last major milestone of reaching 2,000 Angel Squad members, I highlighted how impactful micro-checks can be for founders. Just a few months later, more and more data points are coming in on how these small investments combined with their networks can be the lifeline for early-stage startups. Recently, a Squad member that works at Nike offered to introduce a portfolio company in the clothing space to one of their execs. One discussion led to the next, and Nike has since become that startup’s biggest client yet. People joke about how VCs try to be “value-add”, but angels who work in specific industries or domains can truly be valuable in opening doors for relevant companies in those spaces. Angel investors catalyze entire startup ecosystems. This is what has made Silicon Valley thrive – its robust angel investing community.
Our Vision Continues
Reaching 10,000 Angel Squad applications is incredible, but it’s just the beginning. Our goal remains to grow to 10,000 Squad members and now we’re moving the target to 100,000 angel investors who can support entrepreneurs globally, regardless of their background or location.
But, for us, each application represents more than just a potential investor. It represents a dream of supporting innovation and of believing that great founders can look like anyone and come from anywhere. We’re not just building an investment community; we’re creating a global network that breaks down economic barriers.
Let’s go!
To everyone who has applied, supported, and believed in our mission — thank you. The future of startup investing is global, accessible, and more exciting than ever before.
To mark this 10,000 application milestone, we’re going to go crazy and give away 30-day Guest Passes over the next 10 days.
To apply for a Guest Pass, simply fill out this Typeform. If selected, you’ll get the full Angel Squad experience to attend our weekly workshops, network with the community, and even invest in startups alongside Hustle Fund.
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
One thing no one talks about are the differences in how investors within the same VC firm make investment decisions. Firms are supposed to be united in their decisions. But, the untold secret is that often there’s a lot of disagreement within a partnership over what deals to do. Sometimes these conversations can become heated. But ultimately, if a firm decides to do a deal or pass, the entire firm is united on that front – even if individuals within the firm feel differently. I’ve talked about the differences between the consensus model and the champion model on this blog before.
This is no different at Hustle Fund. There are often deals that I do that the rest of the investment team thinks are awful. And vice versa. Part of why we have a champion model at Hustle Fund — where any investment professional can do any deal he/she likes — is that outliers tend to be the most contentious.
One of the reasons for differences in opinion about a company lies in what individuals think are the most important aspects of an early stage company. For example, my business partner Eric Bahn really values great products and fast shipping of product. Of course, I think this is important as well, but in my list of things that I care most about, product isn’t always top of the list. And of course, it also depends on what the specific industry is. If you’re selling Salesforce to salespeople, then product is less important than if you’re selling a Canva subscription to designers. Product matters more to certain customers than others. But there are many other nuances about how my decision making is different from my colleagues’ that I hadn’t been able to quite articulate before…until now.
First, some context about our decision-making framework at Hustle Fund. When we evaluate startups, we use a 4 point system. 4 is excellent. 1 is terrible. By having a range from 1-4, it forces the decision maker to pick a number that is either on the weaker or stronger side. No one can pick 2.5 — you have to take a stance on whether you believe a given company is strong or weak in a certain area. And then using this point system, we grade a company across a variety of axes. But ultimately, the scores are meant to help our investors guide thinking; there’s no minimum overall score that a company needs to achieve in order to receive an investment offer. Moreover, if a company scored all 4s, it’s also possible for that company to not receive investment. E.g. it might be a pre-IPO company that has clearly proven out an amazing team, an amazing product, amazing traction etc…but then it’s no longer a pre-seed company.
So with our scoring system, the vast majority of companies we meet do not score highly, including those we end up investing in. The companies are all early, and we do not have grade inflation. But the scoring does show patterns in what each of the investors on our team care about. And having amassed a large data set of how our investment team thinks, I’m excited to share with you our results on how each investor on our team differs in thought process.
Average Scores Across Our Criteria:
We used AI to help us analyze our investment patterns. For the companies who received funding from Hustle Fund (our portfolio companies), these were the average scores we gave our companies when we decided to invest.
Team: 2.98
Product: 2.32
Market: 2.79
Execution: 2.76
Fundraisability: 2.48
This is pretty interesting, because you can see that our investment team cares about “team” most importantly. As a whole, when we meet with a founding team, we are making our decisions to invest in large part because we are impressed with the team. In contrast, even if we don’t believe the current product is great or we don’t believe the team can fundraise, we’re often still willing to make the bet anyway. As a generalization, the categories of product and fundraisibility matters a lot less relative to other criteria.
Scores Per Investor (with commentary from AI):
Elizabeth Yin: tends to score lower on average, especially in Product (2.01 average) and Fundraisability (2.19 average)
Eric Bahn: gives higher scores across the board, particularly in Fundraisability (2.65 average)
Haley Bryant: has the highest scores in Execution (3.06) and relatively high in Team (3.5)
Shiyan Koh: has high scores in Market (3.05) and Fundraisability (2.80)
This is particularly interesting and can be interpreted in a few ways.
Since these are scores for companies that get investment, my scores could be interpreted in a couple of ways. You could say I see the weakest dealflow across my team (!) or you could also interpret this to say I’m the hardest grader of everyone, including the companies we invest in. There’s probably some truth to both in that I care less about how developed your product is and care less about a founder’s fundraisibility than my peers. In fact, across the industry, many VCs care a lot about whether a startup will get follow-on funding, but I very much prefer the founder who has less glitz and glamour and just gets to work. It also means that a startup who receives funding from me may end up being largely bootstrapped for longer and may have fewer downstream investors chasing them until they achieve some serious results. That’s a bet that I’m willing to make that few VCs will make.
You can see that Haley cares most about execution and team. Shiyan most about market. This isn’t to say they both don’t care about other criterion, but you can see what we all think a lot about. (Eric gets along with everyone and hands out A+ marks to everyone :).)
Variations in Scoring (with commentary from AI):
The variations in scoring are relatively moderate across all investment team members and criteria, with Fundraisability showing the highest variation for Eric Bahn (1.03) and the lowest for Haley Bryant (0.51). This means that Eric will back a bunch of teams that he thinks can’t raise more money as well as a bunch of teams he thinks will raise money very easily.
Elizabeth Yin and Eric Bahn show more significant variations in Product and Fundraisability scores. This means that Eric and I will back some teams that have great products and high fundraisibility as well as those that don’t. We do this because many ideas don’t require that much money or a rocket science product, but other businesses do. It’s case by case.
Haley Bryant and Shiyan Koh have lower variations in Market and Execution scores, indicating all of their teams need to have strong market arguments and strong executing teams.
Common Themes and Observations:
According to our AI that did this analysis, “Each investor has a distinct scoring pattern, reflecting their unique perspectives or priorities in evaluating startups. This diversity in viewpoints enriches the investment decision-making process but also highlights the importance of consensus-building or weighting different criteria according to strategic priorities.”
Basically, we look at companies in different ways but individually, have distinct things we look for. If I were pitching Hustle Fund with a new company, I would be looking to pitch the person on our team who was best suited for my company. E.g. I would pitch Shiyan if I had a huge fascinating market, but if I were not great at fundraising, I would pitch myself with a more bootstrapped approach.
For more articles like this, join my newsletter:
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
This week, I had a really fascinating conversation with a portfolio founder named Joshua Lee, who’s the CEO and co-founder of a company called Ardius. Ardius helps startups claim R&D tax credits. So it’s a no-brainer why founders sign up for Ardius, because they can get free money, and Ardius takes a cut of what they are able to help founders get. If they can’t help you get any credits, they don’t get paid.
But what was fascinating was that when I was talking with Joshua, he said that one of his learnings in trying so many startups over the years, was that founders don’t think enough about their exit path before starting a company. Ardius, in fact, was not his first company, and so after many companies that didn’t work out, he decided to work backwards to figure out what to build.
I asked him, well, what do you mean?
He said that when he started Ardius, he not only talked with potential customers, but also talked with potential competitors – large companies who could potentially be building a competing product on their own. He was trying to see if he could manufacture his own exit before starting Ardius. He wanted to know what the M&A appetite would be if he were successful. He wanted to know how big of an opportunity large companies saw in what he was building.
And I asked “wasn’t that kind of dangerous to talk to companies that would potentially be building the same thing?” And he said, when he talked with a lot of the major players in the HR benefits space, in fact, many of them were building a competitor to Ardius. And some of them even told him they would squash his company.
While that was frightening to him, his thesis was that if you’re good, startups are actually way scrappier, faster, and more specialized and can run circles around most large companies. And as it would turn out, he was able to plant seeds in their heads that in case they were not happy with their own progress, they should stay in touch.
Ardius ended up doing quite well as an independent entity. And that caught the eye of all of these would-be competitors. Fast forward, Ardius was acquired by Gusto in 2021 after discussing with all the major players in the HR benefits space. These were relationships Joshua had already been building for years, which made the acquisition process quite smooth.
Now this whole story is a pretty controversial path. Many venture capitalists wouldn’t like this path, because VCs would prefer companies to keep raising money if it makes sense to continue to swing for a larger exit. After all, VCs need their winners to be large enough to above and beyond overcome the losses of portfolio companies who fail.
But, Joshua’s view is that VCs should think about the faster liquidity they could get with a manufactured exit. Instead of waiting 15 years to get to 100x (or more), would you rather wait 5 years and take a 10x? He thinks the idea that you have to wait a long time for liquidity in venture is outdated. From an IRR perspective, his model is also way better. In fact, in this particular example, the IRR of the longer time period is 36% vs 58% for the shorter time period.
Not to mention that we didn’t talk about how with his model, the team isn’t grinding too long to lead to burn out. Nor does the team become too big and chaotic, as you often see at large fast-growth late stage startups.
His argument certainly made sense to me. Certainly, if you were running your own angel investments, his proposed model is intriguing. You get your money back sooner, and you can redeploy sooner into other investments.
But, it made me think why this doesn’t work in the traditional VC model. VCs are judged on multiples returned as liquid cash over the term of the fund. Typically funds have a 10 year lifespan. So in this model, the winners aren’t around long enough to become huge winners. And yet, if you’re getting money back in year 5, you don’t have enough time either to deploy the returned capital back into new startups. So, the cash is just sorta stuck — either doing follow on checks into later stage companies, which tend to have lower multiples than early stage startups OR it just gets returned as cash and isn’t enough cash to make up for many of the portfolio losses. In other words, this model — assuming it works — works really well in an evergreen fund but not in a fund with a set term limit of 10 years.
All of that said, his model of building relationships with potential partners / acquirers / competitors from day 1 is smart — even if you aren’t looking to get acquired right away. One of my other portfolio founders did something similar, not for the purpose of M&A, but for the purpose of building relationships and ended up getting acquired by essentially a would-be competitor, because she had built those relationships early.
It may be scary talking with potential competitors – especially when you have nothing – but if you truly believe that your startup is great, you can outcompete your competition. As we’ve seen time and again, more funding does not equate to more success.
One thing that I am skeptical of in this model is the notion that you can actually predict what will be acquired. And therefore, your loss ratio is lower. Afterall, one of the hardest parts about building a startup is finding a repeatable sales process and enough customers who want to pay for your product. M&A demand is predicated on the assumption that your product will find very strong product-market fit. If you are able to find customers but only slowly, your would-be acquirers might decide that there isn’t enough demand for your idea. And, you might not be able to manufacture the M&A deal you thought existed when you set out to begin your company. In other words, I’m skeptical that you can come up with a higher batting average of ideas that are successful that companies will want to buy than the traditional VC model.
I always learn a lot from my portfolio founders, and this model of building-for-exits is certainly food for thought.
If you liked this post, sign up for my email newsletter:
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
Today is a big day for my team. We’re announcing the return of Camp Hustle.
But first, I want to talk a bit about what is top of mind for me going into the new year. One thing I think deeply about a lot is how can we get a lot more great startups funded.
Part of this answer is through our Hustle Fund pre-seed fund. Part of this answer is through our 1000+ member global angel club called Angel Squad.
But the vast majority of this answer lies in helping more investors — whether they are new VCs or angels — in their journey. We need to help more people jump into the startup-investing game AND become successful.
This effort starts with community — connecting more great budding investors together to level up everyone’s investing through capital, knowledge, and networks.
We started resuming live events last year with Camp Hustle 2022 and we’re back this year to help connect more investors.
My colleague Haley Bryant interviewed Sequoia VC Jess Lee at last year’s Camp Hustle
What is Camp Hustle?
Camp Hustle is an in-person event exclusively for investors. (Now, if you’re a founder, I’ll get to why you may care about this in a minute…hang tight and read on…)
It’s a full day of networking (a lot), talks (a few) and live pitches (with real-time pitch analysis). It’s taking place on May 17, 2023 in the Bay Area.
What’s the point?
We write a lot of free content and throw free online events on startup investing. But I’m also a big believer that attending events where you can meet people to help you level up is life-changing.
The purpose of Camp Hustle is to help you meet other investors.
Why would you want to meet other investors? Well, for starters…
to learn about great companies / improve dealflow
to help your existing portfolio companies by building key connections
to help your own VC fund’s fundraising efforts
to grow your angel investing syndicate
to meet kind, creative, successful investors who love the same things you do
What happens at Camp Hustle?
In addition to structured and unstructured networking opportunities, Camp Hustle will also feature:
talks from founders with multi-millions in revenue
a Shark Tank-style pitch event
small group discussions on hot-button topics
ample time to chat with 200 other investors
great food (and s’mores)
Shiyan and I kicking off last year’s Camp Hustle
If you’re a founder, do you want to pitch your business at Camp Hustle?
One of the most requested online events that we’ve often done are pitch-feedback events. This year, at Camp Hustle 2023, you can apply to pitch your startup live (by April 15). And if you’re selected, you’ll get to pitch in front of 200 investors and will receive live feedback on your pitch as well.
Let’s get more great startups funded!
I look forward to seeing you at the event. Grab your ticket here and use the code EYLIST to knock down the price. FYI, that discount code expires on Jan 31.
Regardless, I’d love your help in amplifying this so that we can connect more investors to get more great startups funded.
Hope to see you in person at Camp Hustle!
Want to join my newsletter to receive more posts like this?
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.
Last week, I celebrated my 40th birthday with my family (which is pretty amusing since my birthday was last November).
When I think back about the last few decades, a few stories from my professional life come to mind that I thought I would share here.
1) Serendipity and luck trump everything.
Certainly hard work and skills are important, but luck and being at the right place at the right time is so critical.
I wasn’t born into a family of entrepreneurs or even tech. I got into startups, because of a couple of key events that happened to me. One event that got me into startups happened in 1996 growing up in the SF Bay Area during my freshman year of high school. My best friend Jennifer told me one day that her cousin Tony was building an internet startup. And she asked me if I wanted to help him and their startup over winter break. I didn’t know what a startup was, but I also had nothing major going on during winter break. So, we took the Caltrain up to San Francisco to “help” Tony. When we showed up, the place was honestly a bit of a mess and chaotic. But it was exciting! Tony and his friends were working together on all kinds of projects. They didn’t have to dress up in “grownup-work-clothing”. And they could eat all the pizza they wanted. It was the dream.
I wasn’t any help to their company. But I knew from that day on, *that* was what I wanted to do when I grew up. I didn’t even know how they made money or that there was even money to be made. But, even from that early day, it was inspiring to see a group of friends come together to build something bigger than themselves. A couple years later that company LinkExchange was acquired by Microsoft for a reported ~$200m. Tony — who was Tony Hsieh — would go on to become an active angel investor in many startups and become CEO of Zappos. And while I didn’t know it that day, he would also later have a bigger impact on my life as well as my startup LaunchBit and Hustle Fund, as I’ve written about before here. I’m incredibly grateful for the path he set me on, and that was entirely serendipitous.
2) Failure leads to success.
One of the things I’ve noticed is that most successful people have had *a lot* of failures as well. But people only talk about the successes.
For me, failure and success are oddly connected. When I was nearing the end of college, I thought I wanted to go to business school, and I applied to a few business schools in the fall of my senior year. Throughout this process, I had wanted to visit a couple of business schools I was applying to in Boston, but my money was tight, and I didn’t want to pay for a plane ticket to Boston from California.
Coincidentally, around that time, I saw an ad for a contest, in which the prize was a free trip to Boston from anywhere in the US. I immediately entered the contest on a whim, and amazingly, I won!
The contest was sponsored by the DISCO career forum, which was/is one of the largest job fairs for jobs in Japan. And oddly enough, it was and still is held in Boston every year. In fact, at the job fair, I met tons of people from Japan who flew to Boston just to apply for jobs back home!
I didn’t care about the job fair. I was merely excited to fly to Boston, see my friends, and visit a couple of schools for a couple of days. But, in order to get my reimbursement for my plane ticket, I had to attend the DISCO career forum for 2 days. While there, I met a ton of companies and even interviewed on the spot for various jobs. Although I wasn’t actually looking for a job, by the end of the weekend, I got a job offer!
I soon learned that I didn’t get accepted into any business school, but at this point, I was very excited about the job offer I received and accepted it.
About a year later, I packed my bags and moved to Tokyo. But, a month into it, I was told that I couldn’t stay in that role, because my Japanese was not good enough. Wow, was I getting fired? After just a month into my first job?? That night, I sobbed my eyes out.
To their credit, my former employer was extremely helpful in this situation. They gave me a few choices and told me that I could still stay at the company for about a year if I moved into marketing (so that I wouldn’t have to talk with customers with my poor Japanese 🙂 ). But they didn’t have budget to pay for me much beyond that, so I had to find something else to do.
I decided to re-apply to business school. But this time, I only had time to apply to one school – so I chose to re-apply to MIT which was the school I liked best after visiting. And, fortunately, the entire application was the same except for one question: “What have you done in the last year?” a topic on which I had a lot to say from my experiences in working in Japan. A mere few weeks later, I received an email saying there was a decision ready. I had not even received an opportunity interview this time, so I was pretty certain it was a fast rejection, but it turns out, I had gotten in!
Looking back, failure and success were so well coupled together. I failed to get into business school so I got a job. I failed to keep the job, so I went to business school.
3) Frugality and portfolio construction are keys to wealth. Wealth is freedom.
I am a huge fan of the FIRE (Financial Independence, Retire Early) movement and was an avid reader of Mr. Money Mustache. I think when most people aspire to become wealthy, they think they need to be super successful with building a hit company or something like that so that they can buy all the stuff they want.
In truth, when you get there, many people realize that the stuff isn’t interesting. Wealth is about the ability to be free. Free from ever having to work at a job or on a project you don’t like again. Free from feeling pressure to work with bad people. Free to work on the things you do actually like or find worthwhile. Free to spend your time however you like.
And it actually doesn’t take a life-changing event to become wealthy. Even if you never have a hit company, you can still become wealthy — with frugality and strategic investing.
In my 20s, I quit my job to start a company. My husband was a post-doc (read: paid pretty much nothing). I took odd and end gigs to make ends meet and scrimped like crazy. This was pre-gig-economy, so random jobs I did included being followed around by a researcher from Xerox Parc, categorizing whiskeys, and critiquing MBA resumes for international students. I remember on the rare occasion we would go out to eat, I would get very nervous if we exceeded spending $25 in total.
In looking back on that, most people – especially in my peer group of tech friends – think about $25 as “Oh, it’s just $25.” I have many friends who believe that saving $6 here and there on SBUX lattes and avocado toast is meaningless. It’s just $6. And as a millennial, I do believe there are systemic issues with our financial system and incentives, I also do believe that investing the equivalent of one latte a day can make you a millionaire.
The right way to think about spending decisions is in its compounded value. You take $6 a day and throw on a 7% annual interest rate in the public stock market or 12% annual rate or higher(!) in the private markets. That $6 daily latte is actually worth over $350k+ in your 40s if you take the money and invest it. Just from *investing* your latte money daily, your average person who invests in standard index funds available to everyone and lives an average lifespan *will become a millionaire*.
That’s pretty remarkable.
But I think the topic of portfolio construction for investments is incredibly confusing. And frankly speaking, I think most people find the topic boring and honestly scary – you could lose all your money! Loss aversion is probably one of the biggest roadblocks to more people investing – even in index funds.
I, too, have thought for many years that investing was scary. But I read somewhere when I was very young that putting your money in a savings account actually *loses* you money due to inflation (which today stands at 8%+ annually!). And, I have been investing in index funds ever since my first job in high school. In other words, I was motivated to invest by the idea that I was losing money by merely saving it!
Now at 40, and having seen even some of the meager earnings I had in my teens compound, I still believe index funds are a fantastic place to put your money. You can passively compound and grow it reliably, because it’s diversified and rides on the economic growth of the world.
But, the one thing I do regret about my investment choices was not investing earlier in *private markets*. I didn’t know anything about investing in startups until the last few years. In fact, for many years, the thought had never even crossed my mind to become an angel investor. I always thought you needed to be super loaded to do that.
And then when I was in my 30s, one of my entrepreneur-friends, who at the time had not yet had an exit, told me that he had been angel-investing into friends’ startups with $1k each. This surprised me. How could you invest $1k checks into startups? Why would anyone take that kind of money? I also didn’t understand how he was accredited to be able to do this (I have since learned that his own startup was valued above a certain amount, and his net worth on paper made him accredited). The world of startup investing was utterly unfamiliar to me even though I was a founder myself at the time!
And, it was very inaccessible — there was no information online anywhere on how to get into any of this. Friends learned from friends how to angel invest. I had wished there were an accessible way to get into small check startup investing once I had some level of a portfolio with my index fund investing. I wanted to be able to add some additional risk/higher reward to my portfolio in an educated and balanced way.
And, this is why my colleague Brian Nichols started a program called Angel Squad at Hustle Fund – to empower small angel investors to learn, invest alongside us for even as small as $1k checks, and network with each other as they start and further their angel investing endeavors. We now have almost 1000 angel investors in this community and the next cohort beings soon if you want to apply to join Angel Squad.
4) Family balance is challenging. Take all the help you can get.
Being an entrepreneur is about doing a lot of sprints while running a marathon. I think the only way I’ve made things work is to rely a lot on help and to not attempt or even care about perfection.
How my child perceives me. I would love a gravity-defying computer like that.
Throughout the pandemic, things were tough for just about everyone. I remember this one day that summed up my life: my husband was working at his lab. I had tons of back-to-back meetings as sh*t hit the fan with everything. My older child who didn’t know how to use a computer needed help logging on to an online class. And my younger one wasn’t quite potty trained and had just pooped on the floor and then stepped in it and ran around from room to room. All at the same time.
After that happened, my parents who live a few miles away from me, so graciously offered to take the kids to live with them for the *next several months*. That was huge. And I’m incredibly grateful. I don’t know how we would’ve pulled through without that help.
I recently listened to Indra Nooyi’s memoir My Life in Full: Work, Family, and Our Future about how her career progressed through Pepsi, and the multi-generational help she received from family resonated with me. As much as we’ve progressed and moved forward with society, there’s still a lot of burdens or asks that fall on the mom. Don’t get me wrong, I think my husband is a phenomenal dad, and many of my friends are amazing dads as well. Many dads do so much for their kids and childcare these days.
But society still puts a lot of little burdens on moms in unsuspecting ways. And, it’s the little things that add up. For example, during the pandemic, some of the moms in my kid’s class sent out emails asking folks to submit a page for the school yearbook. Thinking those were mass emails, I just completely ignored them. Eventually, those emails turned into a personal one sent directly to me.
You can bet my husband never received those emails even though he is on the parent list and certainly didn’t receive the direct personal one. I politely responded that unfortunately I didn’t have the bandwidth to do a class yearbook page for my first grader. (I mean…who does a yearbook page for first grade??) You might think, “well, it’s just someone asking you to do a yearbook page – sheesh. No biggie.” But it’s all the hundreds of little requests that happen everyday that compound and particularly on moms.
My child created this sign for my office
As it turned out, the mother who emailed me ended up taking on the task to do the yearbook page *herself* for my first grader. I never saw the yearbook page, because I didn’t order the school yearbook (see #3 on frugality). (Also, did anything interesting even happen during the remote school year?)
Family balance continues to be a struggle, and honestly, I think this is an area that is still being pioneered. After years of getting unhelpful advice from people who have never been in a similar situation before, I think I’ve learned to just embrace the situation. You do the best you can. And that’s ok. Say yes to help. It will work out.
5) Adventures spark inspiration. Routine makes you better. There’s a balance.
Because I grew up the SF Bay Area my whole life, after college graduation, I decided I would go far far away. Even though I knew I wanted to start a company someday, I first wanted to see the world (on someone else’s dime of course — see point #3 on frugality).
So, I left the Bay Area in 2004. I interned at CERN in Switzerland. I worked in Japan in the middle of nowhere (in a town called Suwa in the Nagano prefecture) and also in downtown Tokyo (see point #2 on basically getting fired). I interned in India at Infosys. I briefly worked on a project in New Zealand. I did everything I could to not come back to the Bay Area (until I had my first kid).
Although none of these trips were for the purpose of entrepreneurship or starting a business, oddly enough, I ended up meeting so many people who would end up becoming successful entrepreneurs. For example, in my intern group in India, one person noticed that a lot of food was served on leaves there. He later started a company in the US to make high end disposable plates made out of leaves, and that company is doing really well.
I often hear that one of the best ways to figure out how to start a company is by working at other startups or by trying lots of different business ideas. That certainly is one path. But, sometimes, I think the most off-the-beaten path ideas — the ones with most opportunity — are where others are not looking. And that means also exploring or being an adventurer in paths that others are not taking.
That could mean pursuing an unusual career path. Or living somewhere others are not.
I have been investing in global companies for the past several years now, and while I’m no expert in any and all problems, many of the problems that international entrepreneurs describe to me — at least on some level — are familiar because of my time abroad.
At the same time, running around from place to place and going from one new project to another has its limits. Entrepreneurial skills are honed by doing the same boring thing day in and day out. Just like practicing a sport or a musical instrument, it’s the repetitive mundane that makes you get better. And of course your role changes as your company grows — going from individual contributor to manager to CEO of a large company. But, working on the same problem day in and day out is mundane to many people. And to grow something big is work across a decade or more by doing the same mundane thing better and better everyday.
My thinking about entrepreneurship changed after my company LaunchBit was acquired by BuySellAds in 2014. The CEO and co-founder Todd Garland bootstrapped BuySellAds, and they have quietly become a behemoth. They have grown their ad network tremendously, and they answer to no one. Approaching 15 years, they just continue to hone their supply side and demand side, and that’s how you grow — there are no shortcuts to honing your skills year in and year out.
Most people, including my younger self, don’t have the discipline to do that. But after many years of doing the same thing over and over, eventually you get really good, and a business does well enough to become really exciting. And BuySellAds has been able to push into new initiatives while keeping their cash cow afloat. They’ve gone into other areas beyond ads, building out a portfolio of other businesses, working with great people. This is the kind of stuff you can do when you own your own destiny and don’t need to answer to investors. And it’s the kind of thing you can do when you’ve got a flywheel going. I’m convinced Todd will be one of the first bootstrapped billionaires — AND most people probably won’t ever know it.
I think too many entrepreneurs, including my younger myself, are enamored with getting acquired, because they don’t have the patience and the fortitude to do the same thing day in and day out. (And as a VC, of course, I like exits too). But, as trite as this may sound — my lesson from BuySellAds is that the journey is the reward. Getting better at honing your skills everyday is the goal. Being able to do cool stuff with cool people, work on interesting problems, and make money *is* the dream.
I probably have about 30 — if I’m lucky 40 — good working years left. And, Hustle Fund is my last job. Our mission at Hustle Fund is to democratize wealth via startups by increasing capital, knowledge, and networks in startup ecosystems everywhere. It’s a company I won’t ever sell, because it’s what I want to work on forever. And though not everyday is easy in building Hustle Fund, over the years, I’ve learned to thoroughly enjoy the entrepreneurial journey of embracing all the ups and downs. It’s a joy and a privilege to be able to work on this problem with an amazing team.
These are just a handful of learnings I’ve had over the last couple of decades. I look forward to learning so much more between now and age 50.
Want to join my newsletter to receive more posts like this?
Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.