Unlike institutionalized asset managers that can be acquired, traditional venture firms are not sellable because their core asset is the non-transferable talent of a few key partners. If you cash out the partners, you're left with nothing.
Related Insights
Underperforming VC firms persist because the 7-10+ year feedback loop for returns allows them to raise multiple funds before performance is clear. Additionally, most LPs struggle to distinguish between a manager's true investment skill and market-driven luck.
Unlike in private equity, an early-stage venture investment is a bet on the founder. If an early advisor, IP holder, or previous investor holds significant control, it creates friction and hinders the CEO's ability to execute. QED's experience shows that these situations are untenable and should be avoided.
VCs who spin out of tech giants like Airbnb have a powerful initial network. However, this edge typically expires after their third fund as original colleagues move on, forcing them to build a more durable, independent network to source deals.
Top-performing, founder-led businesses often don't want to sell control. A non-control investment strategy allows access to this exclusive deal flow, tapping into the "founder alpha" from high skin-in-the-game leaders who consistently outperform hired CEOs.
The venture capital industry's tendency to fire founders is so ingrained that simply being founder-friendly became a competitive advantage for Founders Fund. Despite data showing founder-led companies outperform, the emotional 'thrill' of ousting a founder often leads VCs to make value-destructive decisions, creating a market inefficiency.
As top startups delay IPOs indefinitely, institutional portfolios are seeing their venture allocations morph into significant, illiquid growth equity holdings. These "private forever" companies are great businesses but create a portfolio construction problem, tying up capital that would otherwise be recycled into new venture funds.
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.
The venture capital return model has shifted so dramatically that even some multi-billion-dollar exits are insufficient. This forces VCs to screen for 'immortal' founders capable of building $10B+ companies from inception, making traditionally solid businesses run by 'mortal founders' increasingly uninvestable by top funds.
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.
A profitable business that requires the founder's constant involvement is just a high-paying job, not a valuable asset. Enterprise value, which makes a business sellable, is only created when systems and employees can generate profit independently of the founder's direct labor.
