VentureBeat

Toni D. said:

Matt, we wrote about theFunded a couple of times. I have spoken to VCs and angels who feel that they got a bum rap. It is indeed not very pleasant for well meaning investors when they get pinged by a disgruntled entrepreneur who might not have gotten funding for a whole lot of different reasons. That being said, there are good, constructive comments on the site which VCs can use to their benefit to fine tune their investment processes, and improve their relationships with entrepreneurs.

http://www.bizorigin.com/?s=thefunded

Arthur Howe said:

TheFunded is a site for disgruntled entrepreneurs who can’t find funding. The startup CEOs I know are embarrassed by it. They find TheFunded’s posts to be naive to the extreme. Not every company deserves funding: get over it! Some VCs are playing along and trying to game the site by asking their portfolio CEOs to post comments, but these investors are fighting a losing battle. TheFunded will always be just a dumping ground for bitter wannabes.

Jay (living in First Life) said:

This is a dumb site. If a VC firm turns you down for money, get over it. If a VC firm offers you a term sheet and you pick the wrong firm, shame on you for not doing your due diligence beforehand. It’s quite easy, ask the partner at the firm you’re thinking of raising funding from to introduce you to a few other portfolio companies and ask them about their experience with X firm. Sure, there is some bias, but you’ll get a decent feel for what you’re getting yourself into.

Ted said:

I am The Founding Member of TheFunded.com… I have two responses: First, I read all of the posts, and they are almost always insightful, particularly the Private, Member-only advice. You often get a play book on how to close a deal with the venture funds that get reviewed. For example, you learn (a) which partners are good, (b) what to expect in a meeting, and (c) details on what funds are looking to invest in. You even get some tactics used by the fund to extract better terms from you. Whether you are seasoned or a newcomer, this is invaluable information. Most entrepreneurs that I know and that have applied for Membership think the site is long overdue. Second, I don’t know of any good way to do due diligence on a venture fund as an entrepreneur. For example, asking around your social circle is at best inefficient, and asking the fund itself for references is worse. No fund that I know will provide you with the telephone number for a CEO that they fired or that ran a bankrupt company. Another alternative might be asking your advisors, like a lawyer, but they are often biased, too. If someone really has a problem with the site, email me: thefunded -at- gmail. We have implemented dozens of suggestions from entrepreneurs and venture capitalists to help eliminate bias and make the information as accurate as possible. Enjoy! ;-)

Elliott Dahan said:

The Funded is exceptionally valuable and if it can monitor self-serving comments, it will continue to provide a tremendous insight into the world where “entrepreneurs genuflect and VCs pontificate.” The true value of The Funded is to expose those VCs who are arrogant, self-important and generally rude. This is not a matter of dealing with the comments of a disgruntled entrepreneur; it is a matter of simply pointing out that a modicum of grace, civility and good form are always appreciated.

Arthur Howe said:

TheFunded plays on outdated stereotypes. VC = arrogant, rude, self-involved; Entrepreneur = sincere, earnest, trusting. Complete B.S. The overwhelming number of VCs want to make money and realize that good relationships with entrepreneurs are valuable. Furthermore, the cost of starting companies has fallen so much that VCs know they have to compete with super-angels for deals. Funding startups is not a charm school; it’s all about the Benjamins. It’s not good business to piss off entrepreneurs, and VCs know this.

Ken Feldman said:

I applaud Ted and his efforts and I strongly disagree with the negative comments above and strongly agree with Ted. As one of the first members of The Funded, I find it very, very helpful, and so far pretty accurate. It’s called THE WISDOM OF THE MASSES. You get enough people commenting and reviewing and you will get a fairly accurate picture of a VC’s performance.

Many VC’s understand that they are in a service industry, that they have competition, and that to be in it for the long haul they need to bring value to the table beyond just capital. These companies should be highlighted and rewarded, and that is what The Funded does.

Unfortunately many do NOT understand this. There are some VC’s whose arrogance defies description, who ask you to pitch to see if you are competition, or use you as diligence check for another company they are looking at. They take months and months to close deals and then consistently back out at the last minute.

I am not a “bitter wannabe”. This is my third start-up. I leave comments, reviews, etc, and others can agree or disagree with me. We were passed on by a firm (outside their investment model) but yet they were extremely professional about it. That is the review I wrote. I had a very, very bad experience with another – they were all over the place, could not follow what we where saying, arrogant, practically irrational in their behavior and commentary. Yep, I wrote that up too. And guess what, I had people who agreed with me on both.

Why shouldn’t entrepreneurs have a place where they can share their experiences, give advice to each other, point out the good from the bad? Why shouldn’t the newbies in the game gain from the insights of us veterans?

I find it unbelievably IRONIC that the VC’s who have funded so many other startups that use social feedback as a way to guide consumers would be so fearful of having a similar system in place to review them.

Joe said:

The Funded seems to be a good thing. Most VCs I met (I have been in 4 startups, founded 2) are useless, arrogant, and have pretty much no redeeming value. They lie most of the time, renege on commitments and recently, I have seen what I call “Bubble Era VCs” who are “entrepreneurs” who made money in the bubble without a product or customer. Now they are VCs telling experienced engineers and executives what to do.

Having said all this, there are a few (very few) VCs who are good. These typically are older, experienced and mature. Now they may or may not invest - that is their prerogative, but they will not waste your time.

I had a meeting with a Foundation Capital VC - MArk Saul. This guy had his feet up on the table and was half asleep, did not know what we were talking about and had called a CTO of some other portfolio company to listen to the presentation and he did not have a clue. Typically the MBAs are the worst.

The non-MBAs, with PhDs or technical orientation are typically much much better. again these are broad comments and there are always exceptions.

Ted said:

Thanks, Ken. Every entrepreneur that I have spoken about TheFunded.com says the same thing as you: “the reviews are scarily accurate.” People who criticize TheFunded.com probably have not dealt with a wide array of venture funding sources and do not realize the severe polarity between good and bad with few up-front indicators. Our mission is to streamline the often bizzarre process of trying to raise necessary growth capital.

For a bit of back story, the site got started because a legitimate investor went literally crazy and wiped away tens of millions of dollars of value. The person in question used my company as a soap box in some type of personal vendetta mixed with crusade for no explainable economic reason. It was so bad, and I mean bad, that I decided that I would volunteer my time and effort to help anyone and everyone avoid a similar fate.

Critique away. We are here to help, and we are always open to ideas for improvement.

maukj bguymqs said:

gahmzb mfdhl enmvutj hsdbq elkv grih zpoexq

discount tires said:

Useful site. Thank you!