Applying Conway's Law to venture, a firm's strategy is dictated by its fund size and team structure. A $7B fund must participate in mega-rounds to deploy capital effectively, while a smaller fund like Benchmark is structured to pursue astronomical money-on-money returns from earlier stages, making mega-deals strategically illogical.

Micah Rosenbloom of Founder Collective argues that keeping fund sizes small is a strategic choice. It aligns the firm with founders by making smaller, life-changing exits viable, maintaining founder optionality, and focusing on multiples rather than management fees from a large AUM.

The fund-of-funds model, often seen as outdated, finds a modern edge by focusing on small, emerging VC managers. These funds offer the highest potential returns but are difficult for most LPs to source, evaluate, and access. This creates a specialized niche for fund-of-funds that can navigate this opaque market segment effectively.

A smaller fund size enables investments in seemingly niche but potentially lucrative sectors, such as software for dental labs. A larger fund would have to pass on such a deal, not because the founder is weak, but because the potential exit isn't large enough to satisfy their fund return model.

In Vietnam, the best returns have come from a concentrated, hands-on model similar to a holding company, not traditional diversified PE funds. This approach allows for deep involvement in a few assets within a specific vertical, which is key to navigating the market and driving growth.

The venture capital landscape is bifurcating. Large, multi-stage funds leverage scale and network, while small, boutique funds win with deep domain expertise. Mid-sized generalist funds lack a clear competitive edge and risk getting squeezed out by these two dominant models.

Parker Gale intentionally keeps its fund and target company size small. This is a deliberate strategy, not a limitation. It allows them to operate in a target-rich environment with less competition from mega-funds and provides a clear exit path by selling to larger PE firms that need smaller, proven platforms to build upon.

With efficient discovery from accelerators like YC, the main opportunity for smaller VCs is to invest when a promising company stumbles or its re-acceleration is non-obvious. These "glitches in the matrix," where progress is non-linear, are moments where mega-funds might look away, creating an opening.

With a small team, you cannot be an expert in everything. VCU's strategy embraces this by consciously deciding which areas to ignore (e.g., China, private credit). This 'anti-portfolio' approach forces deep focus in the few areas they do choose, turning a resource constraint into a strategic advantage.