A rejection from a competitive university grant program, while disappointing, can be incredibly valuable. It provides critical feedback and can lead to a direct introduction to a visionary early investor from the review committee who sees potential despite the project's initial flaws.

Related Insights

The goal of early validation is not to confirm your genius, but to risk being proven wrong before committing resources. Negative feedback is a valuable outcome that prevents building the wrong product. It often reveals that the real opportunity is "a degree to the left" of the original idea.

An investor's best career P&L winners are not immediate yeses. They often involve an initial pass by either the investor or the company. This shows that timing and building relationships over multiple rounds can be more crucial than a single early-stage decision, as a 'missed round' isn't a 'missed company'.

Instead of being discouraged by over 100 rejections, Canva's founder treated each one as a data point. She added new slides to her pitch deck to pre-emptively address every objection—such as market size or competition—making the pitch stronger and more compelling with each "no."

Instead of dismissing harsh criticism, extract the underlying truth. A brutal investor rejection focused Gamma on intertwining product and growth from the very beginning, acknowledging the difficulty of competing against incumbents. This became a foundational part of their strategy.

The founders of Free Soul endured multiple rejections, including literally being laughed out of rooms. They frame this brutal process as a necessary filter that weeded out misaligned VCs and ultimately led them to investors who were personally connected to their mission.

When an idea is met with a "wall of skepticism" from investors, it can be a positive sign of a good, non-obvious market. If every VC immediately validates your idea, it's likely too obvious and crowded. Proving early skeptics wrong with traction is a powerful path to building a defensible business.

A truly exceptional founder is a talent magnet who will relentlessly iterate until they find a winning model. Rejecting a partnership based on a weak initial idea is a mistake; the founder's talent is the real asset. They will likely pivot to a much bigger opportunity.

When a potential LP dismissed them to advise NFL players, the a16z founders didn't just get discouraged; they got angry. This disrespect became a powerful, "nuclear fire" motivation to succeed and prove the investor wrong, a common pattern for resilient entrepreneurs.

Lonsdale recounts passing on brilliant founders with seemingly terrible ideas, only to watch them pivot and build billion-dollar companies like Cursor. The lesson for early-stage investors is to prioritize backing exceptional, world-class talent, even if their initial concept seems flawed, as they possess the ability to find a winning strategy.

To truly validate their idea, Moonshot AI's founders deliberately sought negative feedback. This approach of "trying to get the no's" ensures honest market signals, helping them avoid the trap of false positive validation from contacts who are just being polite.