The Exchanges

Q Can I ask, what would resonate with you? If I told you that I had strategically planned my path into VC from the age of 13, and the show was a strategic maneuver to get into VC and to become the central node of an ecosystem, would that, would that resonate with you?

A Well, it is impressive. Of course, I know, Harry, that that is, that's the truth. I know that's your story. For, for anybody else, I don't think they need to have been planning their career in venture capital since they were 10, like you. But, But they still don't need to say they fell into it. They can say, look, early in my career, I was doing this. Then later, I did, uh, learn about venture capital, and I thought it would be a really cool way for me to get to work with entrepreneurs, and I got this opportunity, and I was excited to take it, and it's been really great, and I love working with entrepreneurs, and you can say all that without making it sound so flippant. Yeah, yeah, exactly. I mean, even, you know, I'm not saying that you have to have planned your career for From early childhood. But I think there's, there's ways of expressing your gratitude that you had a lucky break that you got into that industry without making it sound like it was so accidental.

AI assessment note: “Well, it is impressive. Of course, I know, Harry, that that is, that's the truth.”

Q How much of a role do you think that just the backing from the brand of a Sequoia or a Benchmark or a Light Speed gives in terms of social validity. I mean, for enterprise companies, having Sequoia behind you can mean a huge amount of recognition from enterprise customers, does it not?

A Well, it's a great question, and I, uh, like to talk about the fantastic investors back in Nuzzle. I mean, we have Andreessen Horwitz and CRV and Lowercase and SoftTech and Homebrew, and they're fantastic, fantastic investors, and of course, we brag about it, but the reality is almost everybody can brag about their investors because there's a lot of top VCs, and so in terms of the entrepreneurial Thinking, oh, I'm a Sequoia company. Therefore, this is going to give me some huge advantage. Well, you may have five other competitors, and that one's backed by Greylock, and that one's a YC company, and that one is backed by, you know, SoftTech and First Round Capital. Again, then there's new, you know, new entrants. There's Founders Fund and Social Capital, and so the idea that, that being a Sequoia company is going to be this huge advantage in terms of the branding, there's a lot of great investors these days that have great reputations, so chances are, if you have a bunch of Competitors. They probably have great names too. And all, and all in all, I think all of that just matters less than we, we like to pretend it does. My experience has been that ultimately if a company is, you know, well-managed and executing well, and the technology works and the product works and they're doing the right things and all that kind of stuff, I mean, that's what really matters.

AI assessment note: “all of that just matters less than we, we like to pretend it does.”

Q Now, I'd love to start off with hearing a bit about, a bit about your story. So you've got Friendster, Angel Investor, Nuzzle. What's kind of a two to three minute highlight of the Jonathan Abraham story? Uh, that's a tough question, I know.

A Well, I started off as a software engineer. So I started off working in Canada at Nortel doing telephone software. And then I, uh, moved to Silicon Valley to work at Netscape, uh, which was a pretty exciting company, um, and had a lot of ups and downs, giving me a sneak peek into a lot of other things. Around two years after I, uh, came to America, I started my first company, which was called Hotlinks. That was in the dot-com boom and then bust era. Um, and Hotlinks was sort of a social bookmarking company way too early, trying to help people share, uh, cool links with each other. Um, and then of course, uh, Friendster, and recently co-founded Foundersten, and now I'm very focused on Nuzzle. And as you mentioned along the way, I've done some angel investing and some other stuff. Uh, I've been involved in a lot of, um, things I think trying to, you know, pay back to the, uh, entrepreneurial community in Silicon Valley. Uh, probably made around Maybe something around 50 angel investments, but right now I'm really focused on Muzzle.

AI assessment note: “I started off as a software engineer. So I started off working in Canada”

Q And then this is a final question from that, which I just can't resist asking. Which influencer would you most like to use Nuzzle?

A Oh boy. You know, that's, that's a really fun one. I mean, you know, it's funny because we'd love, uh, Donald Trump to be on Nuzzle. We'd also love Hillary Clinton. We'd also love Bernie Sanders. I mean, that would be just amazing. Or how about, how about Kim Kardashian? I mean, these people have huge audiences. And, you know, if you, if you're a Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders fan, uh, would you be interested in getting a curated newsletter of sort of the most interesting, you know, news stories that, that Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders supporters would be interested in? I, I mean, I think that would be a very compelling thing that millions and millions of people would be interested in.

AI assessment note: “we'd love Donald Trump to be on Nuzzle. We'd also love Hillary Clinton.”

Q Now, I'd love to start off with hearing a bit about, a bit about your story. So you've got Friendster, Angel Investor, Nuzzle. What's kind of a two to three minute highlight of the Jonathan Abraham story? Uh, that's a tough question, I know.

A Well, I started off as a software engineer. So I started off working in Canada at Nortel doing telephone software. And then I, uh, moved to Silicon Valley to work at Netscape, uh, which was a pretty exciting company, um, and had a lot of ups and downs, giving me a sneak peek into a lot of other things. Around two years after I, uh, came to America, I started my first company, which was called Hotlinks. That was in the dot-com boom and then bust era. Um, and Hotlinks was sort of a social bookmarking company way too early, trying to help people share, uh, cool links with each other. Um, and then of course, uh, Friendster, and recently co-founded Foundersten, and now I'm very focused on Nuzzle. And as you mentioned along the way, I've done some angel investing and some other stuff. Uh, I've been involved in a lot of, um, things I think trying to, you know, pay back to the, uh, entrepreneurial community in Silicon Valley. Uh, probably made around Maybe something around 50 angel investments, but right now I'm really focused on Muzzle.

AI assessment note: “I started off as a software engineer. So I started off working in Canada at Nortel”

Q Um, so when, so when you compare their work, work processes and kind of relationships with you, is it very different?

A I think there is a big difference between these newer, smaller firms and the bigger VC firms. So when you're working with a, a firm like Lowercase, Homebrew, or SoftTech, where it's two or three people, the decision-making process is pretty streamlined. You talk to one person, and maybe they need to talk to another person to make their decision, but I mean, that's pretty fast. When you are working with a very large, sort of classic Santa Road VC firm, most entrepreneurs have had the experience where you go talk to the one Partner there who you know, who sort of invests in your area. Then if that person is interested, they have to, you know, enlist maybe a couple other partners to try to help get on board, help them sell it through the rest of the partnership, and then ultimately at some point you'd have to go and like pitch all 10 partners, some of whom maybe aren't even, um, familiar with your sector as much, and it's a, it's a, it's a drawn out process, and oftentimes you can get bogged down in that firm's politics and decision making process, Things that entrepreneurs often don't even really understand, and I think you just, you're gonna get a lot less of that with a smaller firm. We've also noticed that both Hunter and Satya at Homebrew, all the folks at SoftTech, Matt and Chris at Lowercase, are all engaged, ah, with Nuzzle. I mean, we may be a unique situation that we've …

AI assessment note: “I think there is a big difference between these newer, smaller firms and the bigger VC firms.”

Q But we discussed Peter Fenton earlier there, undoubtedly one of the most successful of our generation, so I have to ask, and this is a really intriguing one for me, do you agree that top VCs have this almost repeatable Playbook or process for success that they can apply to new startups within their portfolio?

A That's a great question, and actually I don't. I kind of think it's, it's the opposite, and I've actually heard people also say that they don't think you can learn much from the failures, and I don't think that's true either. I think there's more in common with the way that startups can fail. The cases where a company goes through a whole series of CEOs in a row, which we've seen over and over again, these kind of sort of self-imposed mismanagement and governance challenges These things do happen again and again and again, but when startups become outliers and have huge success, it's often in a very unique way, and I think that it's very difficult to take that and apply that to a later company and try to copycat that success. I just don't think that's really the way it works, and in fact, I think trying to take what worked for one successful company and then apply it to a later startup is, in fact, one of those patterns of, of Failure that can be imposed, and I, and I've just seen that happen. It's happened to me, so I actually think that's sort of a myth, that there's some sort of playbook for startup success that the top VCs have that they can do again and again, and you know, that was kind of the thinking that I had in 2003, which didn't work out so great for me, thinking that, so that's one of the things that I think is, is not really the case.

AI assessment note: “That's a great question, and actually I don't.”

Q No, I, I definitely agree with you in terms of that signaling. Do you think, though, I have to ask that one can afford to be valuation sensitive in today's frothy market? We often see anywhere between 10 and 30 pre on, on YC companies. Do you think you can afford to be price sensitive today?

A Well, I guess it depends on if you're talking about can you afford in terms of missing out on the companies you really want to invest in, or if you think that it's going to decrease your returns. And I think the idea that if you invested in In a portfolio of companies and your average price is eight pre versus 16 pre that you're going to have half the return. I don't think that's really mathematically correct because it's not going to be necessarily the same companies. So I really think at the seed or angel or even a, I mean, it is all about the outliers. It is all about trying to find companies where you're going to get 10 or 20 or 50 or more in return. And it really matters about just getting into those companies. So I think that It's about picking the right companies, and if you're going to say, okay, this company is an exciting company. I believe in these entrepreneurs. I think they're shooting for something crazy. This could end up being a huge win in my portfolio, but I would invest if it was a ten million dollar valuation, but not 20. You know, I'm not sure if that really works, and like I said, I'd love to see the math. I'd love to see people proving whether this is right or wrong.

AI assessment note: “I would invest if it was a ten million dollar valuation, but not 20”

Q No, I, I definitely agree with you in terms of that signaling. Do you think, though, I have to ask that one can afford to be valuation sensitive in today's frothy market? We often see anywhere between 10 and 30 pre on, on YC companies. Do you think you can afford to be price sensitive today?

A Well, I guess it depends on if you're talking about can you afford in terms of missing out on the companies you really want to invest in, or if you think that it's going to decrease your returns. And I think the idea that if you invested in In a portfolio of companies and your average price is eight pre versus 16 pre that you're going to have half the return. I don't think that's really mathematically correct because it's not going to be necessarily the same companies. So I really think at the seed or angel or even a, I mean, it is all about the outliers. It is all about trying to find companies where you're going to get 10 or 20 or 50 or more in return. And it really matters about just getting into those companies. So I think that It's about picking the right companies, and if you're going to say, okay, this company is an exciting company. I believe in these entrepreneurs. I think they're shooting for something crazy. This could end up being a huge win in my portfolio, but I would invest if it was a ten million dollar valuation, but not 20. You know, I'm not sure if that really works, and like I said, I'd love to see the math. I'd love to see people proving whether this is right or wrong.

AI assessment note: “it is all about the outliers... it really matters about just getting into those companies”

Q But we discussed Peter Fenton earlier there, undoubtedly one of the most successful of our generation, so I have to ask, and this is a really intriguing one for me, do you agree that top VCs have this almost repeatable Playbook or process for success that they can apply to new startups within their portfolio?

A That's a great question, and actually I don't. I kind of think it's, it's the opposite, and I've actually heard people also say that they don't think you can learn much from the failures, and I don't think that's true either. I think there's more in common with the way that startups can fail. The cases where a company goes through a whole series of CEOs in a row, which we've seen over and over again, these kind of sort of self-imposed mismanagement and governance challenges These things do happen again and again and again, but when startups become outliers and have huge success, it's often in a very unique way, and I think that it's very difficult to take that and apply that to a later company and try to copycat that success. I just don't think that's really the way it works, and in fact, I think trying to take what worked for one successful company and then apply it to a later startup is, in fact, one of those patterns of, of Failure that can be imposed, and I, and I've just seen that happen. It's happened to me, so I actually think that's sort of a myth, that there's some sort of playbook for startup success that the top VCs have that they can do again and again, and you know, that was kind of the thinking that I had in 2003, which didn't work out so great for me, thinking that, so that's one of the things that I think is, is not really the case.

AI assessment note: “That's a great question, and actually I don't. I kind of think it's the opposite”

Q Is thematic specialization the future of VC and why?

A Wow, that's an interesting one. I don't know if I can give a quick answer to that. I think I'd have to say yes and no. You know, everybody's trying to talk about their differentiation, and sometimes maybe manufacturer differentiation, and I think that That you can go in, in two directions either way. I mean, they're, they're software VCs who are investing in, in mattress companies and coffee and things like that. And, you know, I've, I've learned my lesson to try to stick to things I know about. On the other hand, they're, they're VCs now who, you know, only want to, uh, invest in these very niche frontier tech areas. And I think that may be incorrect as well. I think you have to be a little bit more opportunistic and see what entrepreneurs are doing. So I think you have to sort of do the happy medium in between.

AI assessment note: “I think you have to sort of do the happy medium in between.”

Q So that's your route into Nuzzle, and we discussed the show there, and you very kindly said you listen, and other guests on the show have said they fell into VC, and you said in the conversation before that you're surprised by the amount of Vs that say they fell into VC. So why is this, and why are you surprised?

A I am surprised about it, and especially surprised that they're actually saying that, and I actually, a while ago, months ago, I think I actually tweeted a And I said, you know, my advice as a founder is that's probably not the way you want to position it, and since then, people, you know, still say it, and it does surprise me, because first of all, when you hear venture capital, you know, famous VCs sometimes in the media talking about the lack of diversity in their firms and being challenged about it and saying that they can't relax their standards, and fair enough, but when then you hear people saying that they fell into it, it sort of makes you think there's a bit of a contradiction between People who just somehow miraculously fall into the venture world, and then the lack of diversity. And the other thing is that it's just a weird way, I think, of positioning it. Even if early in your career, you weren't planning to become a venture capital investor, I think there are ways that it could be portrayed, the path that probably are going to sound more appealing to entrepreneurs listening. And as an entrepreneur, it just doesn't resonate with me to say you fell into it, because entrepreneurship, you really fell into it. I mean, usually it's a lot of risks, a lot of Hard work. A lot of proactive effort in, you know, creating something out of nothing. So I just think it's a, it's a…

AI assessment note: “there's a bit of a contradiction between People who just somehow miraculously fall into”

Q and Elad Gill has said before on the show that many VCs are searching for the next big thing, and are investing in frontier tech, That they maybe don't understand instead of software. So I'm intrigued to hear your thoughts on this. And do you think that's a fair summary? And do you think that it, it could cause almost the mirroring of the green and nanotech days of 2001?

A Yeah, I think a lot, first of all, is a very smart guy and a very great blogger. He's not, he, you know, runs a company, so he doesn't have time to pump out a lot of stuff, but what he does write is very high quality. And I think that the parallels he's making between nanotech and green tech are accurate. I think that there may be a lot of pain that happens from people investing in areas they're not familiar with. Elad also points out that some of these other areas just don't have the same economics of software. Another interesting blog is from NextView, which I think is in Boston, and I actually don't even know those guys. They're not an investor in Nuzzle, but I found that they've written some really interesting stuff, and they just wrote about their new fund and said that contrary to some people, they don't think the internet and software and all this kind of stuff is over. They don't think it's over at all, and I think they're right. I think Cloud and social and mobile, that stuff is not over. There's going to be more great companies. There's going to be more innovation. So the idea that it's all over and you need to sort of jump into some biotech or some other frontier science thing, I don't think that's actually true. And I think if you're going to jump into those areas, you really need to know what you're doing. I'm an LP in data collective, which was started by Zach Bog…

AI assessment note: “I think that the parallels he's making between nanotech and green tech are accurate.”

Q But I want to talk then first, let's start off with Netscape. What were the biggest learnings for you? Because obviously that was in, you know, the very early formative years of your career and such a momentous company. It's such a, a transitioning time of probably the tech landscape. So what was the big takeaways for you from that experience?

A Well, getting an entry to Silicon Valley, to the Silicon Valley culture was a big deal. Being at Netscape and being exposed to those kind of people probably was important for me, uh, becoming an entrepreneur and sort of understanding the way things were done in Silicon Valley. It was an amazing company, and there were a lot of really smart people working there, and one of the first major players in the internet, commercialization of the internet, but I think Netscape had a lot of opportunities it didn't actually successfully achieve, because if you, if you think about so many of the things that came after, you think, why didn't, you know, why wasn't Netscape the company that did web mail and instant messaging and just so many of these different things? Uh, while I was there, the company had a lot of, uh, different strategies, and it seemed like the company should have been more focused. We were, we were interested in groupware and tools and clients and servers and, Um, e-commerce and, and just so many different things all at the same time. So I'd say probably one of the lessons would be trying to be a bit more focused.

AI assessment note: “one of the lessons would be trying to be a bit more focused.”

Q But I want to talk then first, let's start off with Netscape. What were the biggest learnings for you? Because obviously that was in, you know, the very early formative years of your career and such a momentous company. It's such a, a transitioning time of probably the tech landscape. So what was the big takeaways for you from that experience?

A Well, getting an entry to Silicon Valley, to the Silicon Valley culture was a big deal. Being at Netscape and being exposed to those kind of people probably was important for me, uh, becoming an entrepreneur and sort of understanding the way things were done in Silicon Valley. It was an amazing company, and there were a lot of really smart people working there, and one of the first major players in the internet, commercialization of the internet, but I think Netscape had a lot of opportunities it didn't actually successfully achieve, because if you, if you think about so many of the things that came after, you think, why didn't, you know, why wasn't Netscape the company that did web mail and instant messaging and just so many of these different things? Uh, while I was there, the company had a lot of, uh, different strategies, and it seemed like the company should have been more focused. We were, we were interested in groupware and tools and clients and servers and, Um, e-commerce and, and just so many different things all at the same time. So I'd say probably one of the lessons would be trying to be a bit more focused.

AI assessment note: “one of the lessons would be trying to be a bit more focused.”

Q And you said there about not many people doing it and doing it well is one of the kind of, uh, reasons for you starting Nuzzle. And so I have to ask then, although, although that is the case, what is the competitive landscape for news, news aggregation? I think you'd probably put it as, would you?

A Well, there's a ton of news aggregators and news apps. And during the, you know, relatively short time we've been working on Nuzzle, some of them have already come and gone and more keep coming out. Now there's Apple news from Apple, for example. All the other news apps, as well as all the other social networking services, aren't really doing what Nuzzle does. They're not trying to cope with the overload and give you less rather than more. In some sense, I think Nuzzle's vision and the problems we're trying to solve and the way we're trying to solve them remain quite unique, which is why I think there's a reason that Nuzzle exists, but it is a crowded landscape in terms of other, uh, aggregation and, and news apps, and that actually is a challenge, um, and that's, you know, why we're trying to be a lot more than just a news app. I think CB Insights and Monday Note have, have sort of written about different news apps, and they've talked about, you know, mentioned Nuzzle, usually pretty positively is one of the few that maybe has some potential, but still lumping us into some sort of news app category, and actually, we think it's, it's, there are too many news apps, and we think it's really hard to grow as a news app, which is why that's not what we're really trying. You know, we, we view Nuzzle as a lot more than a news app,

AI assessment note: “it is a crowded landscape in terms of other, uh, aggregation and, and news apps”

Q Can I ask, what would resonate with you? If I told you that I had strategically planned my path into VC from the age of 13, and the show was a strategic maneuver to get into VC and to become the central node of an ecosystem, would that, would that resonate with you?

A Well, it is impressive. Of course, I know, Harry, that that is, that's the truth. I know that's your story. For, for anybody else, I don't think they need to have been planning their career in venture capital since they were 10, like you. But, But they still don't need to say they fell into it. They can say, look, early in my career, I was doing this. Then later, I did, uh, learn about venture capital, and I thought it would be a really cool way for me to get to work with entrepreneurs, and I got this opportunity, and I was excited to take it, and it's been really great, and I love working with entrepreneurs, and you can say all that without making it sound so flippant. Yeah, yeah, exactly. I mean, even, you know, I'm not saying that you have to have planned your career for From early childhood. But I think there's, there's ways of expressing your gratitude that you had a lucky break that you got into that industry without making it sound like it was so accidental.

AI assessment note: “Well, it is impressive. Of course, I know, Harry, that that is, that's the truth.”

Q So that's your route into Nuzzle, and we discussed the show there, and you very kindly said you listen, and other guests on the show have said they fell into VC, and you said in the conversation before that you're surprised by the amount of Vs that say they fell into VC. So why is this, and why are you surprised?

A I am surprised about it, and especially surprised that they're actually saying that, and I actually, a while ago, months ago, I think I actually tweeted a And I said, you know, my advice as a founder is that's probably not the way you want to position it, and since then, people, you know, still say it, and it does surprise me, because first of all, when you hear venture capital, you know, famous VCs sometimes in the media talking about the lack of diversity in their firms and being challenged about it and saying that they can't relax their standards, and fair enough, but when then you hear people saying that they fell into it, it sort of makes you think there's a bit of a contradiction between People who just somehow miraculously fall into the venture world, and then the lack of diversity. And the other thing is that it's just a weird way, I think, of positioning it. Even if early in your career, you weren't planning to become a venture capital investor, I think there are ways that it could be portrayed, the path that probably are going to sound more appealing to entrepreneurs listening. And as an entrepreneur, it just doesn't resonate with me to say you fell into it, because entrepreneurship, you really fell into it. I mean, usually it's a lot of risks, a lot of Hard work. A lot of proactive effort in, you know, creating something out of nothing. So I just think it's a, it's a…

AI assessment note: “it sort of makes you think there's a bit of a contradiction”

Q I would love that, and now I'm 21, I can finally drink in the U.S. after four years of waiting, but moving on from mojitos, For those that have been living under a rock and missed your first show, talk to me. How did you make your way into the world of tech and come to be founder of my personal favorite, and I think most used app, being Nuzzle?

A Well, first of all, thank you for the kind words, and it's, it's always fun to hear your guests on your show talking about how they use Nuzzle, uh, as you know, I listen to, yes, I listen to most of your episodes, a big fan, and it's always fun to hear, in addition to the interesting conversations about BC, to also hear people talking about loving Nuzzle, that's always a bonus. In my In my case, you know, I think everything I've done and started, even Founders Den, uh, has been the result of years of thinking about something and usually a personal problem I'm trying to solve. So in the case of Nuzzle, I was just like a lot of people having trouble keeping up. I was overwhelmed and overloaded with content and with social sharing, and I, I really didn't have time to keep up and, and click on every single link that my friends were sharing on Facebook and Twitter. So I needed something to manage and tame that chaos for me and, Tell me this is the most important content you need to know about and pay attention to. So that's really how Nuzzle got started.

AI assessment note: “So I needed something to manage and tame that chaos for me”

Q that will agree has killed it over the past few years is Peter Fenton at Benchmark, one that you made the intro to, so huge thank you to that, because without that, the interview we had with him wouldn't have happened. But he said in our episode, never turn down a company based on valuation because it's a mental trap. So tell me, what are your views towards valuation sensitivity?

A Yeah, Peter's great. I actually met Peter when he was actually still at Excel before Benchmark had even poached him a while back, and big fan. He's also a Nuzzle user, and I tend to agree with Peter. It's an interesting question. I've heard you talk about this with a lot of guests on your show, and the funny thing is, you know, I'm an entrepreneur. I'm an entrepreneur and an engineer, so I, a lot of times, try to break things down and understand it analytically, and when it comes to this idea of whether you should be price sensitive or not, there's a lot of different opinions, and none of them really seem to be backed up by data, so it'd be interesting if a venture capitalist came on the show and said, look, we analyzed our data, and over the last three funds with this many different companies, we took the bottom half in terms of our entry price, and the TVPI on average was this versus This for the more expensive deals, and therefore that proves that we should or should not be price sensitive. But I don't really hear people coming on the show and really using data. It usually just seems to be sort of personal religion almost about these things. In my case, the angel investments that I've made that were a little high in price have been ones that I was glad that I've made. And when I see ones that are sort of below market or really on the cheaper side, usually they're not the dea…

AI assessment note: “I tend to agree with Peter. It's an interesting question.”

Q We mentioned about the playbook to success there. One thing that I think I've really seen just pattern matching in, in the most successful VCs I've interviewed is how they think about board seats and also how they've personally developed as a board member over their career. Having, having, uh, you know, managed many boards before, from the operations perspective, how do you analyze the best board members? I'm intrigued.

A Well, that's a tough one, because, uh, you know, this is an unpopular opinion, but I think most boards are just not very successful, and you look at some of the, um, things that you read in the press about very famous companies sometimes, and some of these companies have, uh, some of the most famous venture capitalists behind them, and then you see lawsuits, you see them going through multiple CEOs in quick succession. It's, it's really tough. I think a lot of boards are They're just not very successful. I think a lot of people are on too many boards. So even if you are a fantastic board member, I don't know how you can be a fantastic board member at, at 10 companies or 15 companies at once. I just think that requires sort of a, a superhuman attribute. Um, and I think a lot of boards have the wrong composition. Sometimes I think they have too many investors and some boards are sort of staffed with sort of like famous celebrity types, people like former politicians and stuff like that. And I think more boards should probably have more nerdy Choices like more CFOs, more CIOs, CTOs, CMOs. I think there should be just more boring operational people on, on some of these boards than the, you know, quite as many celebrities and investors, but ultimately it's pretty tough. I think managing a board is something that, that most entrepreneurs probably don't quite understand how to do, pro…

AI assessment note: “more boards should probably have more nerdy Choices like more CFOs, more CIOs”

Q But I do want to ask then, because the frothy market is often due to the increased number of entrants, so Specifically at seed and micro VC. So I have to ask, are there too many seed or micro VCs in your opinion today?

A Well, first of all, I think seed funding is actually going down, not up. I think that's been the data that I've, that I've seen from a bunch of folks. In terms of valuations, I think those might have already hit their peak in 2000 and maybe 15. So the idea that the valuations have just, you know, as they went up throughout 2000, maybe 10 to 2015, I don't think they've continued to go up in 16 and 17. So I don't think it's quite the, the crisis of, of seed overfunding and overvaluation. I think the biggest problem with valuation was the later stage valuations of so-called unicorns. That was, I think, a bigger problem, and it's, that's still, to some extent, sitting around in some companies, some overvalued companies having raised hundreds of millions of dollars. That's a whole other thing than, you know, the world I play in as an angel investor. In terms of the seed and micro VC world, There is a lot of noise about there's so many new entrants into micro VC and there's so many new funds and all this kind of stuff. I actually kind of think it's a good thing because I think a lot of these new funds have been fantastic and a lot of great stuff is going on. I think it's sort of the next generation of the venture world, but the reality for most entrepreneurs is there's not 300 micro VC funds that they're actually pitching. If you narrow the list down into geography and focus on speci…

AI assessment note: “I actually kind of think it's a good thing because I think a lot”

Q like Nuzzle to grow, but is Nuzzle not like a marketplace where the value prop for each user grows as more and more users come online? You know, my, my Nuzzle now is so much better. Now everyone is connected in the networks. Do you know what I mean? The more of my friends that come on, the better my curation gets. Does that not make it easier to grow?

A Well, I said that it was hard for any news app to grow. So I think what a lot of people have found is that growing as an app only in the app store is really tough. And there have been some players that have really been just an app. So Nuzzle actually started off when we were in the prototype stage. As a website. And then immediately people started asking for an email digest. So of course we have Android and iPhone apps that have been featured by Apple and Google in a very high ratings, but we also have, uh, web and email, uh, presence, which I think is actually important for SEO and for virality. I think just being an iOS app, you know, or, or iOS and Android app alone, it's harder to grow. There's been some exceptions, but it's, but it's tough. And I think also, News apps in general as well. I think it's a tough, tough to really grow fast because even though you see people tweeting every day about how much they love Nuzzle, there are obviously news junkies who use Nuzzle and love it and tweet about it, journalists and VCs and other people. Um, you know, a lot of people just use, use a product like an email client or a news app, use it every day and do so, you know, sort of silently, uh, without necessarily talking about it. So that's why we think there's other things we can do that are actually more viral. Than a news app. So for example, we want to take all the power users wh…

AI assessment note: “I think it's a tough, tough to really grow fast because even though”

Q you've, you've worked with very much the old god of VC, with, you know, Kleiner and Benchmark and Battery backing Friendster, and then now with Nuzzle, it seems, it seems you've purposefully maybe adopted the new guys with Homebrew, Softech and lowercase, all of whom, previous guests, legends , we love them. But, but was that purposefully, and what's the comparison when working with these very different styles of VC?

A Well, it's a great question. We actually do have some old school, and I, I don't think they're going to want to be called that, but old school VC investors in, in Nuzzle as well. So for example, George Zachary at CRV was one of the very first people to commit to investing in Nuzzle. And he's somebody I've known a long time. Uh, I met him, I think he was actually at a different VC firm, uh, when I was just working at Netscape and trying to learn about how that stuff worked. Uh, but CRV, you know, I would consider more of a, a classic VC firm. So we do have some big VCs. Andreessen Horwitz is an investor in Nuzzle. Of course, they're, they're very, very big, but they are, are also pretty, pretty new and still, I think in some ways represent sort of like first run capital, a very entrepreneur, uh, sort of focused, uh, idea of, of what a VC firm should be started by people who have been entrepreneurs. But you're right, you know, at the seed stage now, there's all these new players. And there was recently, um, uh, Steve Anderson baseline was, was on a magazine about how fantastic he's done. So there's a lot of these, These new players that are doing really, really well, and we've been happy to have some of them, uh, involved with Nuzzle, so Lowercase, Homebrew, and Softech are, are three of our very engaged investors, um, all three of whom, they all use our product as well, um, and …

AI assessment note: “We actually do have some old school... VC investors in, in Nuzzle as well.”

Q I would love that, and now I'm 21, I can finally drink in the U.S. after four years of waiting, but moving on from mojitos, For those that have been living under a rock and missed your first show, talk to me. How did you make your way into the world of tech and come to be founder of my personal favorite, and I think most used app, being Nuzzle?

A Well, first of all, thank you for the kind words, and it's, it's always fun to hear your guests on your show talking about how they use Nuzzle, uh, as you know, I listen to, yes, I listen to most of your episodes, a big fan, and it's always fun to hear, in addition to the interesting conversations about BC, to also hear people talking about loving Nuzzle, that's always a bonus. In my In my case, you know, I think everything I've done and started, even Founders Den, uh, has been the result of years of thinking about something and usually a personal problem I'm trying to solve. So in the case of Nuzzle, I was just like a lot of people having trouble keeping up. I was overwhelmed and overloaded with content and with social sharing, and I, I really didn't have time to keep up and, and click on every single link that my friends were sharing on Facebook and Twitter. So I needed something to manage and tame that chaos for me and, Tell me this is the most important content you need to know about and pay attention to. So that's really how Nuzzle got started.

AI assessment note: “I needed something to manage and tame that chaos for me”

Q Is thematic specialization the future of VC and why?

A Wow, that's an interesting one. I don't know if I can give a quick answer to that. I think I'd have to say yes and no. You know, everybody's trying to talk about their differentiation, and sometimes maybe manufacturer differentiation, and I think that That you can go in, in two directions either way. I mean, they're, they're software VCs who are investing in, in mattress companies and coffee and things like that. And, you know, I've, I've learned my lesson to try to stick to things I know about. On the other hand, they're, they're VCs now who, you know, only want to, uh, invest in these very niche frontier tech areas. And I think that may be incorrect as well. I think you have to be a little bit more opportunistic and see what entrepreneurs are doing. So I think you have to sort of do the happy medium in between.

AI assessment note: “I think you have to sort of do the happy medium in between.”

Q that will agree has killed it over the past few years is Peter Fenton at Benchmark, one that you made the intro to, so huge thank you to that, because without that, the interview we had with him wouldn't have happened. But he said in our episode, never turn down a company based on valuation because it's a mental trap. So tell me, what are your views towards valuation sensitivity?

A Yeah, Peter's great. I actually met Peter when he was actually still at Excel before Benchmark had even poached him a while back, and big fan. He's also a Nuzzle user, and I tend to agree with Peter. It's an interesting question. I've heard you talk about this with a lot of guests on your show, and the funny thing is, you know, I'm an entrepreneur. I'm an entrepreneur and an engineer, so I, a lot of times, try to break things down and understand it analytically, and when it comes to this idea of whether you should be price sensitive or not, there's a lot of different opinions, and none of them really seem to be backed up by data, so it'd be interesting if a venture capitalist came on the show and said, look, we analyzed our data, and over the last three funds with this many different companies, we took the bottom half in terms of our entry price, and the TVPI on average was this versus This for the more expensive deals, and therefore that proves that we should or should not be price sensitive. But I don't really hear people coming on the show and really using data. It usually just seems to be sort of personal religion almost about these things. In my case, the angel investments that I've made that were a little high in price have been ones that I was glad that I've made. And when I see ones that are sort of below market or really on the cheaper side, usually they're not the dea…

AI assessment note: “I tend to agree with Peter.”

Q you've, you've worked with very much the old god of VC, with, you know, Kleiner and Benchmark and Battery backing Friendster, and then now with Nuzzle, it seems, it seems you've purposefully maybe adopted the new guys with Homebrew, Softech and lowercase, all of whom, previous guests, legends , we love them. But, but was that purposefully, and what's the comparison when working with these very different styles of VC?

A Well, it's a great question. We actually do have some old school, and I, I don't think they're going to want to be called that, but old school VC investors in, in Nuzzle as well. So for example, George Zachary at CRV was one of the very first people to commit to investing in Nuzzle. And he's somebody I've known a long time. Uh, I met him, I think he was actually at a different VC firm, uh, when I was just working at Netscape and trying to learn about how that stuff worked. Uh, but CRV, you know, I would consider more of a, a classic VC firm. So we do have some big VCs. Andreessen Horwitz is an investor in Nuzzle. Of course, they're, they're very, very big, but they are, are also pretty, pretty new and still, I think in some ways represent sort of like first run capital, a very entrepreneur, uh, sort of focused, uh, idea of, of what a VC firm should be started by people who have been entrepreneurs. But you're right, you know, at the seed stage now, there's all these new players. And there was recently, um, uh, Steve Anderson baseline was, was on a magazine about how fantastic he's done. So there's a lot of these, These new players that are doing really, really well, and we've been happy to have some of them, uh, involved with Nuzzle, so Lowercase, Homebrew, and Softech are, are three of our very engaged investors, um, all three of whom, they all use our product as well, um, and …

AI assessment note: “We actually do have some old school... VC investors in, in Nuzzle as well.”

Q So you would not say, I'm genuinely intrigued here from a personal perspective. Would you not say it, or would you just use an alternative means of saying it?

A Well, I think it's just one of those terms right now that's been getting kind of trite and cliche. I've been hearing people use it too much, and it's just become a really trendy word, and I just kind of think it's interesting, because when I hear everybody talking about how they're investing in conviction, it makes me wonder why do they feel the need to say that. Is that they're really the opposite going on? Is it that people internally really are having some insidiousness But the lack of conviction, and therefore they feel necessary to talk about conviction, or does everybody feel that somehow conviction is a differentiator? I guess I'm just wondering why is everybody using this word so much lately, and it is getting to the point where, where I hear it, I just start sort of chuckling inside.

AI assessment note: “Well, I think it's just one of those terms right now that's been getting”

Q We mentioned about the playbook to success there. One thing that I think I've really seen just pattern matching in, in the most successful VCs I've interviewed is how they think about board seats and also how they've personally developed as a board member over their career. Having, having, uh, you know, managed many boards before, from the operations perspective, how do you analyze the best board members? I'm intrigued.

A Well, that's a tough one, because, uh, you know, this is an unpopular opinion, but I think most boards are just not very successful, and you look at some of the, um, things that you read in the press about very famous companies sometimes, and some of these companies have, uh, some of the most famous venture capitalists behind them, and then you see lawsuits, you see them going through multiple CEOs in quick succession. It's, it's really tough. I think a lot of boards are They're just not very successful. I think a lot of people are on too many boards. So even if you are a fantastic board member, I don't know how you can be a fantastic board member at, at 10 companies or 15 companies at once. I just think that requires sort of a, a superhuman attribute. Um, and I think a lot of boards have the wrong composition. Sometimes I think they have too many investors and some boards are sort of staffed with sort of like famous celebrity types, people like former politicians and stuff like that. And I think more boards should probably have more nerdy Choices like more CFOs, more CIOs, CTOs, CMOs. I think there should be just more boring operational people on, on some of these boards than the, you know, quite as many celebrities and investors, but ultimately it's pretty tough. I think managing a board is something that, that most entrepreneurs probably don't quite understand how to do, pro…

AI assessment note: “this is an unpopular opinion, but I think most boards are just not very successful”