The VC snoman video reminds us of a post we’d intended to write, but which we dropped when ValleyWag got there first.
It is about the proper etiquette for a venture capitalist, while hearing a pitch from an entrepreneur.
VCs are the ones with the money, so they can treat the poor entrepreneur as they please, right? That means fiddle with their blackberry, take calls during the meeting, arrive late, and so on.
Well, Mark Suster, chief executive of Silicon Valley content collaboration start-up Koral, recently lost it while visiting a venture firm called Granite Ventures in San Francisco. His rant is long, but here’s the gist:
So I’m stuck with the paper shuffler and the Blackberry man. I am not kidding you when I say that I was on the verge of literally saying, “let’s just call this meeting a day. It’s clear you have no respect for me and no interest in my company.” I bit my tongue (which my wife will tell you is rare). I finished the next 15 painful minutes and said goodbye. My only regret … the $25 I had to pay to park in their building. They were seriously the most pompous, self-centered, unprofessional group of people that I have come across in a long time. I went to back to their website and unsurprisingly there were no great companies I had ever heard of. I later learned that they were a spin out from an investment bank. It all made sense. They were not “real” VCs.
Valley gossip site Valleywag unearthed the fact that the firm he ragged on was Granite, and at least provided some perspective on the firm. It isn’t that second rate.
The amusing thing is that VentureBeat had the same experience with the Granite guys, but came away with a slightly different feeling — perhaps because we weren’t pitching, merely doing a routine meet-and-greet. They came and went as they pleased during the meeting, and several of them had their phones out, and were fiddling. So much that I even switched the conversation to compare the various phones we had around the room. That livened them up a bit. I wasn’t dismayed by their etiquette. Five partners were there, and that wasn’t like most VC firms, where I typically am able to meet with only one or two, or at most three partners. I appreciated the informality. And I’ve long gotten over the cellphone fiddling. At dinner recently, a friend started checking her Treo email during dessert, so I took the opportunity to check mine too. And valley entrepreneurs like Pankaj Shah sleep with their Blackberry and don’t stop checking it when we’re around them (see story, and click on image for video clip, and then hit play). So we checked in with Mark Suster to ask him why he took it so hard. We also contacted Granite a few weeks ago for comment, but they never responded (also common VC etiquette).
Suster (pictured left) said he wrote his piece more as a caricature, and never intended to out the firm, or make anyone feel bad. The firm had indeed stood out from among the 14 firms he’d visited. However, Granite’s lead partner had called him as he had seen the piece, and apologized. Another partner let him know his wife had a baby, and while not an excuse, he’d been particularly distracted. Suster clearly didn’t want to inflame the situation any more than he already had. Good news is, Suster has raised seed funding — clearly, not from Granite.
Our social norms are changing. Question to entrepreneurs: In 2007, will it be ok for VCs to fiddle with a Blackberry while you’re pitching? Or not?
Tags: inv:Granite-Ventures24 Comments
-
cg said:
I’m confused, are you talking about Silicon Valley? Or Hollywood?
Disgraceful behavior regardless.
-
Annonymous said:
Absolutely not.
Just imagine if a VC was giving feedback, and the entrepreneur started fiddling with his phone, or took a call.
Paying attention shows you respect the time of the person talking to you. Regardless of whether this becomes widely adopted, the fact is that *good* vcs already understand this, and get along great with entrepreneurs (Moritz, First Round)
Crappy VCs (anyone who comes from consulting, ibanking or law i’m talking to you) are the ones who are the rudest, but will luckily all be washed out of this business in about 5 years. :)
-
Dave! said:
Not.
Everyone is busy, that’s a given. But there’s no excuse for that… It’s a sign of complete and utter disrespect. The message is clear: you are not important to me or this firm. Period.
If you can’t focus your attention for 30 minutes during a meeting without the interruption, how can you be expected to focus on helping the company grow into something successful?
-
carl said:
when a lack of understanding an idea is expressed by ridicule and/or apathy/dismissal as opposed to that good old fashioned thing, discussion and debate/thinking.
steak is more important than sizzle and a credible/profitable business plan is more important than an elevator pitch.
still, reading about yet another video clips web site receiving several million $s funding would seem to rather undermine that naive belief, i guess?
-
Brian McConnell said:
I think the problem is that people that work in the tech industry are so accustomed to constant distraction now that this is normal behavior for them. I don’t take it personally, but do think that in a formal meeting people should turn their phones off.
I don’t have a Blackberry for this reason. I just use a plain old IMAP client on my mobile phone. I only check email when I want to, so the thing is not constantly bleeping at me. Email is not for urgent communication.
I rarely get “building is on fire” type messages. If there really is an emergency, someone will call me or text me, repeatedly. That’s a simple rule of thumb. If a co-worker calls 3 or 4 times in a row, probably good to take the call. Otherwise, it can usually wait an hour. Email is more productive that way too.
-
carl said:
when questioned regarding his lack of urgency regards replying to emails, a former colleague of mine used to say in response: “there is no such thing as an urgent email - if it was urgent you’d have called me.”
-
ValleyGrunt said:
I fully relate to Shuster’s experience. The worst thing, IMHO, is the attitude of most VCs to not get back soon (if at all) to an entrepreneur pitching a venture; I have heard and myself undergone several experiences where the VC was extremely enthusiastic during the pitch, and refuses to respond to emails (how hard is it to say no, politely?) after that. It came as no surprise to me that the VC firms that are known to get back to you quickly (either declining or expressing interest) are the marquee firms.
-
Cathy said:
“Everybody does it,” is a rationalization. In a time and industry where everybody’s time is precious, this behavior is immature and rude regardless of rank or role in the deal.
-
Franc said:
I used to call VCs LSGs, or Lazy, Stupid,
and Greedy. Now I should add an I for impolite.Trust me, most VCs are arrogant. But the funny thing is, the majority of them are just fund
managers and they never really made any money.
Many of them have not even realized that if they someday make any money that is because of the responsible and hard working enterpreuners.
If these good guys don’t take their money,
well, they’ll be crying on poverty sooner or later.It is still tough time for both VCs and enterpreuners. So there are bad feelings.
-
noah kagan said:
I went down to LA recently for 1 meeting with a company to remain anonymous. For the ENTIRE 35 minutes we spoke with them the director played with his cell phone. Super annoying.
-
John P. said:
If I was on the first date with a girl, and she answered he phone in the middle of dinner, I’d just call it a night immediately.
I’d do the same thing with any VC, if they aren’t showing you respect at that early stage, just imagine what it will be like down the line.
I refuse to compromise my selfworth for money or *gasp* even sex.
-
Leon said:
I would think checking for email if you expect something urgent is understandable. Of course, several people all doing it constantly is a different matter.
I have pitched to a few VC’s in the past. I would have to say the situation described by the article is unusual although it is true that it is not always easy to get a direct yes or no from a VC. The fact of the matter perhaps is that they do not have a clear answer after most of the meetings.
-
Rob Hyndman said:
Spoiled, bratty, juvenile behaviour. This is about impulse control problems and the need for ongoing adult supervision, nothing more or less. If it’s so urgent that you need to read it the *second* it comes in, don’t go to the meeting, or have your assistant watch for it and come in and quietly alert you when it comes. Pay attention, and grow up.
-
David P said:
I’ve met with maybe a dozen firms in the last 90 days (from grade A to a few guys on their first fund) and only had one guy play with his blackberry during my presentation. Once you picked it up, he apologized… saying that he wanted to email the ‘office’ to have someone check on competing solutions (to my business). Not completely rude.. but could have waited.
My overall impression is that VC’s really do want to find good deals. However, it’s easy to notice in 5 minutes or less if there is any interest.
I’ve since changed my tactic to a phone call first - where we talk through the opportunity with all risks laid out. If there is still interest - then we’ll have a meeting. Otherwise you end up driving around SV with little to no progress. Most VC’s are very open to a 20-30 minute call prior to a meeting. Their attention span is less than 20 minutes (can’t blame them there) - so an early call can take the in-person 40 minute presentation down to 15-20 minutes and then into Q&A - which is really where you need to be… that’s where a deal progresses.
-
Seamus McCauley said:
I’ve got a phone that I use to take notes on in meetings. Like lots of phones, it has Word and Excel and is usually the most convenient thing for me to put brief notes into, not least because I always have it with me.
After a couple of meetings in which people clearly thought I was (rudely) emailing while they talked, I took to explaining that I was making notes before getting my phone out.
By next year, I expect people will have got into the habit of claiming they are “just taking notes” when they are really emailing. So it goes.
-
Andy said:
I used to see this more often than I do today, and I present to VC’s all the time. Maybe it’s up to the presenter to put together a fast start and grab people’s attention. Another tip is to turn off your own PDA first, visibly. Food for thought. I met the GGVC people recently and had a completely different experience. They were very attentive and friendly.
-
Christine Herron said:
There’s no point in meetings that you’re not interested in. What ever happened to the introductory call? (Kudos to David P.) I’d rather spend 15 minutes on the phone than waste an hour-plus of both the CEO’s and my time in a pointless meeting.
So I don’t bring my phone into meetings…though I DO use a laptop to take notes. No human can write as quickly as a CEO talks. (Yes, I am really taking notes!) >:-)
-
Nettaree said:
This behavior is prevalent in a lot of industries. It’s indicative of the technology world we live in today. Instant gratification on every front has consumed America. Is it rude? Yes. Will it stop? No. I use to be a slave to my Blackberry too. Actually, I got more work done during meetings with my handheld device and laptop in full throttle, but I only displayed this type of behavior when I was NOT INTERESTED or forced to sit in a meeting in which I provided no value. At times I felt justified for “keeping connected”, but once I began to catch the glimpses of the forlorn faces that were disturbed by my behavior, I kicked the habit.
I’m Nettaree and I’m a recovering Blackberry-a-holic.
-
John said:
You get the same behavior from VC’s who are on your Board. I can’t remember a Board meeting (from several different companies now) where the VC’s on the Board didn’t take out there cell, blackberry, or whatever and start fiddling with it. Not just once, but several times during the meeting.
The respect level would go up considerably if after 15 minutes into a pitch, the VC would simply state that this isn’t right for them, thank the company for coming by and end the meeting. Instead they play with their phone…
-
John said:
I’ve been in meetings with a lot of VCs, and I think it’s great that so many VCs fiddle rudely with their Blackberrys, ‘cos it makes the few who don’t Blackberry during meetings stand out all the more as the genuine article (attentive, evaluative, responsive, etc.).
-
Sam S said:
There’s an illusion among a slice of the digerati that near constant activity is a sign that you’re accomplishing a lot. I know a number of these multitaskaholics who’re on IM, the phone, and/or email simultaneously for extended periods. These people are almost universally the least strategic thinkers incomparison to their peers. They’re full of activity with little regard to goal. This is about the worst type of VC I can imagine - someone who is so caught up in the tactical that they can’t see the strategic importance of what’s literally right in front of them. In today’s deal flow climate, this behavior is amazingly bone-headed. If I were the managing partner at a place where the line staff treated a potential 30x investment with disrespect…they’d be out on their ass before lunch.
-
Mark Montgomery said:
A couple of points from the perspective of an entrepreneur who operates a small VC firm. First is that arrogance is a form of ignorance.
Second is that I won’t waste my time with anyone in any meeting where the people involved are not paying attention. If one of several is fiddling with an emergency ping or phone call, that’s one thing. If everyone is fiddling then their fiddles are obviously more important than the agenda, and they should be doing something else for a living.
I’d also let my network know to avoid them sending others to waste their time, and so the market can eventually correct.
That said- one good way to avoid this scenario is to provide something unique and valuable to the folks involved, which is frankly really rare, and despite reality otherwise- anything else shouldn’t be funded. More dollars than brains these days in an era where billion dollar funds are common.
I think the SV VC model is broken- it has been since me toos became the norm. I don’t meet with tons of people all day or in conferences simply because it would not allow me to remain on top of my game.
What’s far worse to me are VCs (especially when it’s their specialist) who don’t understand the technology or business environment being discussed. Same too for entrepreneurs seeking millions of $ in OPM who haven’t done their homework.
Symptoms here of greater problems folks, and certainly not limited to one firm in one mtg on one day. .02, MM
-
Gordon said:
I was a VC for nearly 12 years so I know of what I speak. There are a number of great points in this thread. First, it is undeniably rude to be multi-tasking durng a meeting whether it’s a Board meeting or a pitch. The direct message that is being delivered by the VCs in the situation is. “My Time is more valuable than yours but please continue trying to convince me otherwise.” While most VCs wouldn’t consciously acknowledge that’s how they felt, it’s what’s going on. I’ll bet that most VCs today wouldn’t take a blackberry into a meeting with Sergey and Larry at Google. But 7 years ago, when the Google Twins were pitching a new search engine (huh? Didn’t Yahoo already kill that space?) there was probably a lot of Bberrying and WAP phone checking during their meetings. Kudos to Andy Bechtolsheim for actually listening. (as an aside, check out the Anti-Portfolio on the Bessemer Ventures website for a great peek into the typical reaction to Google back in the early days. Kudos to Dave Cowan for his unvarnished honesty) So today, Larry and Sergey’s time is usually more valuable than most VCs’ time. But if you’re at the front end of that wealth curve, expect rude behavior from most VCs. Don’t take it personally. The dirty little secret in the VC world (well chronicled in last months VC Journal) is that the majority of General Partners in VC funds have never made a dime in carried interest and are basically just mutual fund managers investing in a riskier asset. I’m willing to bet that there are a fair number of VC on the Midas list that haven’t made much or any money in VC for themselves. (I’m now on the LP side so I actually see that data) It’s extremely hard to make serious money in VC - the top decile funds dominate the take - everyone else mostly lives on management fees. For every John Doerr or Mike Moritz there are 75 or 100 GPs who take home zilch after 10 years in a fund. So much of the rudeness from these GPs is really just insecurity - being rude, overly busy and arrogant to mask the fact that they aren’t what everyone believes them to be. A generalization to be sure but it’s much more common than you think.
Important to remember also that not all rudeness from VCs is driven by insecurity - Don Valentine at Sequioa was famously ‘gruff’ usually opening meetings with entrepreneurs by asking the question - “Why the F&ck should I give you my money?” Since Don was actually one the most successful VCs in the Valley, he had every right to ask the question. It’s called ‘not suffering fools lightly’GK
