The 'classic' VC model hunts for unproven talent in niche areas. The now-dominant 'super compounder' model argues the biggest market inefficiency is underestimating the best companies. This justifies investing in obvious winners at any price, believing that outlier returns will cover the high entry cost.

The most successful venture investors share two key traits: they originate investments from a first-principles or contrarian standpoint, and they possess the conviction to concentrate significant capital into their winning portfolio companies as they emerge.

Breakthrough companies often succeed not by iterating endlessly, but by 'planting a flag'—making a strong, often contrarian bet on a core thesis (e.g., email-first media) and relentlessly executing against that vision, even when it's unpopular or lacks momentum.

The most effective investors deliberately carve out unstructured time for deep thinking and reading. This discipline contrasts with the common early-stage VC tendency to equate a packed calendar with productivity. True investment alpha is generated from unique insights, not just from the volume of meetings taken.

Resist the common trend of chasing popular deals. Instead, invest years in deeply understanding a specific, narrow sector. This specialized expertise allows you to make smarter investment decisions, add unique value to companies, and potentially secure better deal pricing when opportunities eventually arise.

The high-stakes world of deal-making is described as 'the flow,' a state that rewards total commitment but punishes those who are 'half in, half out.' Success requires giving one's all to the ecosystem, as it extracts value from those who only attempt to take from it.

Large, contrarian investments feel like career risk to partners in a traditional VC firm, leading to bureaucracy and diluted conviction. Founder-led firms with small, centralized decision-making teams can operate with more decisiveness, enabling them to make the bold, potentially firm-defining bets that consensus-driven partnerships would avoid.

Unlike operating companies that seek consistency, VC firms hunt for outliers. This requires a 'stewardship' model that empowers outlier talent with autonomy. A traditional, top-down CEO model that enforces uniformity would stifle the very contrarian thinking necessary for venture success. The job is to enable, not manage.

Large tech conferences often foster consensus views, leading VCs to chase the same deals. A better strategy is to attend smaller, niche events specific to an industry (e.g., legal tech). This provides an information advantage and helps develop a unique investment perspective away from the herd.