Contrary to the 'get in early' mantra, the certainty of a 3-5x return on a category-defining company like Databricks can be a more attractive investment than a high-risk seed deal. The time and risk-adjusted returns for late-stage winners are often superior.

By defending the pro rata rights of early backers against new, powerful investors, founders play an "infinite game." This builds a reputation for fairness that compounds over time, attracting higher-quality partners and investors in future rounds.

Mega-funds can justify paying "stupid prices" at the seed stage because they aren't underwriting a seed-stage return. Instead, they are buying an option on the next, much larger round where they'll deploy real capital. This allows them to outbid smaller funds who need to generate returns from the initial investment itself.

The seed investing landscape isn't just expanding; it's actively replacing its previous generation. Legacy boutique seed firms are being squeezed by large multistage funds and new emerging managers, implying a VC's relevance has a 10-15 year cycle before a new cohort takes over.

To win highly sought-after deals, growth investors must build relationships years in advance. This involves providing tangible help with hiring, customer introductions, and strategic advice, effectively acting as an investor long before deploying capital.

When a company like Synthesia gets a $3B offer, founder and VC incentives decouple. For a founder with 10% equity, the lifestyle difference between a $300M exit and a potential $1B future exit is minimal. For a VC, that same 3.3x growth can mean the difference between a decent and a great fund return, making them far more willing to gamble.

The rise of founder-optimized fundraising—raising smaller, more frequent rounds to minimize dilution—is systematically eroding traditional VC ownership models. What is a savvy capital strategy for a founder directly translates into a VC failing to meet their ownership targets, creating a fundamental conflict in the ecosystem.

Series A is a brutal competition where top-tier firms have an insurmountable advantage. Their brand and network are so powerful that if a smaller fund wins a competitive Series A deal against them, it’s a strong negative signal that the top firms passed for a reason.

This provides a simple but powerful framework for venture investing. For companies in markets with demonstrably huge TAMs (e.g., AI coding), valuation is secondary to backing the winner. For markets with a more uncertain or constrained TAM (e.g., vertical SaaS), traditional valuation discipline and entry price matter significantly.