Founder-Backed, High-Impact

contact deftly

VC Disrupt: Roll Over Great Showmen

I'll say it out loud. Many VCs don't earn their keep.Not because they aren't good people or don't mean well. Mostly, because they are not set up to do so.Think about it. The typical VC structure is meant to maximize management fees and carry. Translated: the more money they manage, the more fees and upside they have. Bigger funds usually translate into bigger checks, unintended risk-aversion, less portfolio bandwidth from the principals and a muted ability to drive the portfolio.Not to mention that they are also generally backed by passive capital and tend to focus on showmanship, rather than impact.This is why I'm launching, a focused, collaborative fund that is backed by founders for founders. There's one simple goal: actively leverage experience and relationships to support founding teams who are dedicated to building something meaningful.Think of it as a "retro" fund. Retro in the sense that it is bringing "venture" back into venture investing. Not only in terms of risk adoption, but more importantly, in terms of helping founders move the needle with their business as much as with their funding strategy.Sort of like the way early-stage VC was done 10+ years ago before funds got bloated, had more roman numerals after their names and before angel syndicates started spraying dollars across every direction with little focus on adding value.After more than a dozen years working closely with early-stage founders and sitting side-by-side with many of them in hundreds of investor meetings, I think I've heard it all: "TAM is too small", "I'd like to see more traction" and "there's lots of competition in the space". You get the idea. The need for "smart", engaged capital has never been greater. I see it every single day.So, to the founders out there who are scrappy, passionate and yes, act with deft -- you have met your match. Let's get to work!Arie