Get your free personalized podcast brief
We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.
The quality of the founder is the single most important variable. A great founder with a mediocre plan will outperform a mediocre founder with a great plan. The best investment strategy is to back exceptional people and give them leeway, as they will create upside that breaks all precedents.
Related Insights
Extensive diligence on a seed-stage company's market or product is often wasted effort. The majority of successful seed investments pivot to a completely different business model, making the founding team's quality and resilience the most crucial factor to evaluate.
a16z's investment philosophy is to assess founders on how world-class they are at their core strengths. Horowitz warns it's a mistake to pass on a uniquely talented founder due to fixable weaknesses (e.g., no go-to-market plan) and an equal mistake to back a less talented founder just because they lack obvious flaws.
When you find a special founder, all other rules (ownership targets, valuation) can be broken. Andreessen echoes VC pioneer Arthur Rock's conclusion: he would have been a better investor by focusing 100% on the founder's resume and ignoring the business plan entirely. Great people trump everything else.
Ben Horowitz states a common VC mistake is over-indexing on a startup's weaknesses. The better investment is a team that is unequivocally the best at a single, critical thing. Being "pretty good" at everything is a red flag, as greatness in one area is what drives extraordinary outcomes.
Sequoia's founder taught that the best investments are in individuals who are both exceptional and "not so easy to get along with." These founders challenge convention and refuse to accept the world as it is, a trait that makes them unconventional but also uniquely capable of building category-defining companies.
Rabois's investment formula requires a founder to be the absolute best he's ever met in at least one specific dimension—be it intelligence, tenacity, or strategy. He avoids investing in founders who are merely B+ across the board, betting instead on extreme, world-class exceptionalism.
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 evaluating revolutionary ideas, traditional Total Addressable Market (TAM) analysis is useless. VCs should instead bet on founders with a "world-bending vision" capable of inducing a new market, not just capturing an existing one. Have the humility to admit you can't predict market size and instead back the visionary founder.
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.
Venture capital should focus on what a founder does exceptionally well, rather than penalizing them for past failures or weaknesses. Ben Horowitz uses the Adam Neumann example to illustrate their principle: judge people by their spectacular talents (like building the WeWork brand) and help them manage their flaws, which is a more effective strategy than seeking perfectly flawless individuals.
