TLDR

Equipping VC analysts and associates with a clear narrative is crucial; they're your internal champions.

Understanding the Role of Analysts, Associates and Principals

• Analysts and Associates:

  • These team members often handle initial deal screening, research and due diligence.

  • They are gatekeepers to the decision-makers (GPs) and typically manage a high volume of deals, filtering the best ones for deeper consideration.

• Principals:

  • Principals are often closer to decision-making and may have more influence over investment committee discussions.

  • They usually take a more active role in evaluating deals and pitching them to GPs.

They Need a Clear Narrative: Without a strong and well-articulated narrative, they won’t be able to effectively advocate for your company in front of the decision-makers.

Don’t Try to Skip the Line: Going straight to a General Partner might seem like the smartest move, but it may not be. Associates and Principals are the ones who shape internal opinions, write memos and make the case for which deals deserve partner attention. Find a sharp associate who understands the firm’s thesis and get them excited about your story — they’re your first real champion.

Summary

Equipping VC analysts, associates and principals is crucial. They are your vital internal champions who prepare deals for partners. A clear narrative and respecting their essential role are key to effectively navigating the VC firm and securing critical attention for your startup.

Apply

Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

憐愛

TLDR

Founders often confuse problem, solution, and product. Clear distinctions are crucial for effective messaging, strategic development, and successful fundraising.

Clarity

Founders all too often may confuse problem, solution, and product, undermining their startup's clarity and credibility. Understanding the distinct role of each is crucial for effective messaging, strategic development and fundraising.

Let's use an example everyone is familiar with: OpenAI and ChatGPT.

Problem

The unmet need, pain, or opportunity that exists independently of your company.

Example (OpenAI): People struggle to access accurate, useful information quickly and formulate effective queries.

Solution

Your strategic approach to addressing the problem, not the final tool itself.

Example (OpenAI): Employ a large language model trained on extensive text to generate human-like, context-aware responses to natural language queries.

Product

The tangible offering that delivers your solution to users.

Example (OpenAI): ChatGPT, a web-based conversational AI for real-time question-answering.

What May Go Wrong

"The problem is there's no chatbot that answers everything." This describes a missing product, not a fundamental problem. A problem is a pre-existing need or pain, not the absence of a specific tool.

"Our solution is an app that uses AI to answer questions." This describes your product. Your solution is the underlying strategic approach (e.g., leveraging AI via natural language processing (NLP) and generation), not the delivery mechanism.

Why This Matters:

Clarity in defining these terms enables founders to:

• Develop and test better hypotheses.

• Craft compelling narratives for investors and users.

• Remain grounded in user needs rather than merely feature development.

Before You Pitch, Ensure:

• You've identified a genuine problem.

• Your solution is a well-defined strategic approach.

• Your product is the optimal vehicle to deliver that solution at scale.

Clarity fosters credibility. Speak with precision.

Summary

Founders must distinguish problem, solution, and product for clarity, credibility, and fundraising success. Precise definitions enable better hypotheses, compelling narratives, and user-centric development. Understanding these distinct roles is critical for startup success and investor confidence.

Apply

Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

TLDR

Don't misalign grand problems with small solutions. Instead, focus on specific pain points, conduct broad discovery and deep research, iterate, iterate, iterate, and validate extensively before building too long and too much.

Problem/Solution Misalignment

All too often a founder highlights a massive problem in the world — world hunger or food inequality, domestic violence, poverty, or climate change. These are all noble problems to solve. Solutions that follow sound something like: an app for artisanal farmers to digitize their business (a useful tool, but not tackling systemic food inequality), a ring that detects date rape drugs (addresses a symptom, not the root of domestic violence), a budgeting app for low-income families (helpful, but not ending poverty), or a conflict mineral-based battery (improving one aspect of climate impact, but not 'solving' climate change).

These are the kinds of problems that look inspiring on a pitch deck but often signal naïveté if a founder claims to "solve" them outright. When seen, it’s a huge red flag. It signals a founder hasn't done their homework. They clearly don't understand their market, the forces at play, or, most importantly, who their actual customer is.

Some of these solutions may still be beneficial, but not to the problem it’s addressing. In this case, the founder needs to zoom in on the specific problem they can solve. For instance, instead of 'ending food inequality,' perhaps it's 'empowering female farmers in Ghana with access to drought-resistant seeds.' This demonstrates a clear understanding of a solvable niche. In other cases, the founder needs to go back to the drawing board, do more customer discovery, and build a solution for a real problem.

Not all problem/solution misalignments are due to macro problems with a micro solution; some of them are just a stretch. This misalignment is a glaring signal to investors that the founder doesn’t understand their market or their customer. For founders, it's a critical reminder: before you build, truly understand the problem you're equipped to solve and seeking investors to fund.

Minimize Misalignment

So, how do you minimize this common pitfall? The following are a few critical steps that help founders to get real before they build:

• Obsess over the Problem, Not the Idea: Before you even think about a solution, dig deep into the problem. What is the precise pain point? Who experiences it, and how acutely? How do they cope with it today? Don't fall in love with your brilliant idea until you've truly understood the fire it's meant to put out.

• Conduct Rigorous Customer Discovery: This isn't just about surveys. It's about getting out of the building and having unfiltered conversations with potential customers. Ask open-ended questions. Listen more than you talk. Look for genuine frustrations, workarounds, and unmet needs. Your goal is to uncover the real problem, not confirm your assumptions.

• Define Your Niche with Surgical Precision: Once you understand the problem, narrow your focus. Instead of solving "world hunger," identify a solvable segment like "improving market access for small-scale maize farmers in rural East Africa." This demonstrates market understanding and a viable path to impact (i.e., beachhead), rather than grand, unachievable claims.

• Validate, Validate, Validate (Before You Build Big): Don't just assume your refined problem and potential solution are correct. Test them. This could mean a simple landing page to gauge interest, a low-fidelity prototype, or even selling a preliminary version of your service manually. Get real-world feedback before investing significant time and capital.

By following these steps and others, founders may move beyond inspiring but naive claims, building solutions that genuinely address specific, painful problems for a well-understood customer base. It's about really doing your homework, getting granular, and proving demand, particularly via revenue, not emotion, gut, or theory, before scaling and burning capital, especially investors'.

Summary

Founders all too often present solutions misaligned with grand problems, indicating a lack of market and customer understanding. Avoid this by obsessing over precise pain points, conducting extensive customer discovery and deep research, defining niches (i.e., beachheads), and validating solutions with real revenue before building big with venture capital.

Apply

Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Investor Liaison Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

TLDR

Accelerators like YC and Techstars may offer capital for equity with the lure of easier raises. In reality, no shortcut may exist and founders must still take the time to build relationships and traction in order to raise additional funds after either program.

Shortcut

Founders, are you looking for a shortcut to raising money? Do you hate talking to investors? Would you consider giving up a significant percentage of your company to an accelerator just to shortcut your fundraising? Think very carefully before you leap.

Unpack the "Give/Gets"

When considering accelerator programs, it's crucial to understand the precise financial mechanics. This isn't just about getting money; it's about the structure of that money and what it means for your ownership and investor alignment.

• Y Combinator (YC) Deal: YC Deal

  • The Investment: YC invests a total of $500,000. This is strategically split: $125,000 converts into a fixed 7% equity, and the remaining $375,000 is invested on an uncapped SAFE (Simple Agreement for Future Equity) with a Most Favored Nation (MFN) clause.

• Techstars Deal: Link: Techstars Investment Terms

  • The Investment: Techstars invests up to $220,000. This is typically $20,000 in exchange for 5% common stock equity, and an additional $200,000 via an uncapped SAFE with an MFN clause.

Disillusionment

Let's cut through the noise: there is no shortcut to funding. The widely publicized stories of overnight success or lightning-fast rounds can create a false expectation. The allure of quick cash or a "fast track" through an exclusive network can lead to significant disillusionment when reality sets in.

Fundamentally, raising capital for your startup is a process built on two non-negotiable pillars: relationships and traction. Relationships take considerable time to build. Investors aren't just writing checks; they're betting on people. Trust, which is key in most investments, takes consistent effort and time to establish. It's about demonstrating your integrity, your foresight, and your execution capabilities over a sustained period.

Equally important is traction. Your product, your market fit, your early users, your revenue – these things tend to not happen overnight. They are the result of consistent iterative work. An accelerator might provide valuable structure and connections, but it cannot invent your traction or force genuine relationships into existence. Giving up a significant chunk of your company for the lure of a shortcut to future funding may actually mean you're trading long-term equity for short-term delusion.

So, sit down. Buckle up. And understand this clearly: it may be a long and bumpy ride. The road to funding may be long, arduous, and filled with rejections and pivots. Embrace the journey, focus relentlessly on building your business, and understand that the most reliable path to securing capital is by building genuine relationships and demonstrating undeniable traction. There's no magical “bypass” button.

Apply

Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

TLDR

To raise or not to raise. The allure of vast VC funding can veil the cost of dilution. Bootstrapping may be a stronger path, delaying the ask until proof of concept takes form and revenue is solid.

Headlines

Headlines all too often read: “XYZ Startup Raises another round to expand its XYZ offering.” We see this narrative again and again, founders touting their ability to charm their way into investors' pockets. It sets the tone for new founders: the only way to be a successful founder is to raise millions, even billions, and perhaps one day trillions of dollars. But does that really signal a great founder?

Think about the economics. The more you raise, the more you get diluted, and the same goes for your investors. The higher your valuation the further you push the goal line to success.

Example

Imagine two people start XYZ Startup. They each own half of it, like having two equal slices of a pie. Let's say the whole pie is represented by 1 million pieces (shares). Each founder has 500,000 pieces.

The First Offering (Seed Funding):

To grow their company, they need money. So, they decide to sell a small part of their future pie to investors for $1 million. They offer 200,000 new pieces of pie.

• Now, there are more total pieces of pie (1.2 million).

• The original founders still have their 500,000 pieces each, but now those pieces represent a smaller part of the whole pie (about 41.67% each).

• The investors now own 200,000 pieces (about 16.67% of the pie).

This shrinking of the original owners' share is called dilution. They still own the same number of pieces, but their ownership percentage is less because there are more total pieces.

The Second Offering (Series A Funding):

Later, to grow even more, XYZ Startup needs more money. They sell another 300,000 new pieces of pie to new investors.

• Now, there are even more total pieces (1.5 million).

• The original founders still hold 500,000 pieces each, but their part of the total pie shrinks again (to about 33.33% each).

• The first investors still have their 200,000 pieces (now about 13.33%).

• The new investors own 300,000 pieces (20%).

The Simple Truth:

Every time the company sells more pieces of the pie (issues more shares) to get money, the original owners end up owning a smaller percentage of the entire pie. Even if the company becomes very valuable, their individual slice, while potentially worth more in total value, is smaller in proportion to the whole.

This example shows that while raising money is often necessary for growth, founders need to understand that it comes at the cost of giving up a portion of their ownership in the company.

Bootstrapping

Depending on where in the world you are building, your access to early stage capital may be limited and you may have no choice but to bootstrap. This is more common in emerging markets, where investors tend to be more risk averse.

There are pros and cons to bootstrapping. If you can bootstrap your way to your first raise and bring in some revenue, you are much more attractive to investors and may be able to get better terms than if you were to raise with an idea on a napkin. You have the added benefit of less dilution.

The con is you may not be in a position to bootstrap and the idea will die without funding.

Summary

Sometimes it is not a question of whether you should raise, but when. Of course, this is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Here are some questions to ask: What is your runway? What is your burn rate? Are you bringing in revenue? Can you wait to onboard more customers, bring in more revenue, show more traction? If yes, it may be beneficial to raise less and later rather than more and sooner.

Apply

Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Investor Liaison Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

TLDR

Venture capital is a team sport; don't disrespect or ignore anyone. Make your pitch clear so others can champion it as a credible venture deal.

Overlook

Founders may all too often overlook Venture fund analysts and associates and want to go straight to the top—the GPs—thinking they’ll bypass the noise and head straight to the decision-maker and get investment faster. But that’s not really how VC works.

Sure, a GP might occasionally source a deal directly. But more often than not, if a deal hits their desk, it gets handed off to an associate. Why? Because it’s the analyst’s or associate’s job to screen opportunities, run due diligence, and champion the ones they believe in. As admins and assistants are to corporate executives so VC analysts and associates may have far more power than meets the eye.

Never underestimate VC team members who are the first point of contact. They can be a powerful force in your corner if you treat them with respect, provide clear and credible information, and respond in a timely manner.

Roles

• Analysts and Associates:

  • May handle initial deal screening, research, and due diligence.

  • May be gatekeepers to the decision-makers (GPs) and manage a high volume of deals, filtering the best ones for deeper consideration.

• Principals:

  • May be closer to decision-making and may have more influence over investment committee discussions.

  • May take a more active role in evaluating deals and driving them internally.

Credible

A clear, credible, and compelling Venture narrative may be lacking from a deal.

Even if the VC’s front line team loves you, your team, and your company, they can’t champion internally what they can’t explain. If your pitch is confusing or your deck is unclear, you may have lost a huge internal ally.

As the founder, your job is to make it easy for others to easily explain: "This is a credible founder we need to bet on, and here's why."

Imagine being given not five, ten, or twenty minutes, but maybe one minute or even one sentence to clearly and credibly separate a pitch from the masses.

Remember, the opportunity needs to be delivered fluently in venture capital speak, not the all-too-often provided founder speak.

The venture language and culture are unique, which is why front-line venture capital workers may fight well above their weight class in terms of translation abilities.

It takes time and thought to translate startup ideas that may move those outside the industry while completely falling short in moving the venture capital machine inside.

Teamwork

To founders seriously seeking venture capital funding, please consider:

• Refine your narrative: What’s your 10- to 1,000-times return? Why now? Why you?

• Simplify your deck: Make your story obvious in the first five slides or less; maybe better yet, one slide with as few words as possible and powerful pictures.

• Equip them: Anticipate objections and provide answers the front-line associates can take to the internal investment committee table.

• Be responsive: Momentum matters. To the extent reasonably possible, promptly and clearly reply to requests to continue the conversation.

The fund partners might make the final decision behind closed doors, as private equity is private, so it may be the public-facing team that gets your deal in the room.

Summary

Venture capital is a team sport. Founders often mistakenly focus solely on general partners (GPs), overlooking the crucial role of others. Frontline VC team members are initial gatekeepers, responsible for screening deals and championing the credible. To win, founders should craft a clear and credible venture narrative that resonates with the entire VC team, making it easy for them to advocate internally. Practical steps for founders include refining their story, simplifying their pitch deck, equipping others with answers to potential objections, and being responsive. While partners may make the final investment decisions, it's the broader Venture team that gets a deal done.

Apply

Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Investor Liaison Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

Innovation

Founders often obsess over finding something "new"—a new technology, a new market, a never-before-seen idea. But the truth is, some billion-dollar companies weren't born from invention. They came from innovation: rethinking something familiar and doing it better, faster, cheaper, or for a different customer.

Airbnb didn't invent travel. Stripe didn't invent payments. Even Tesla didn't invent electric cars. What they did was reframe the opportunity, rethink the distribution or redesign the experience (i.e., innovate).

The danger with chasing novelty is that it may easily lead into a market that doesn't exist, or worse, one that doesn’t need or even want to exist. Instead of asking "What hasn't been done?" or getting infected with analysis paralysis, please consider:

• What's broken?

• What's inconvenient?

• What’s being ignored?

• What's outdated?

Market

If you take something people already pay for or are asking for—particularly a significant population (business-to-consumer) or companies (business-to-business), not merely a small group of friends and family—and then innovate around a massive market demand, not a personal obsession or passing trend, you may not need to reinvent the wheel; you may simply need to get it rolling in a new direction.

This is EVFM’s Master Thesis 02: Prefer Innovation Over Invention. It's not about the tech—it's about the insight. When you innovate around real problems, you unlock the opportunity for accelerated traction, adoption and compounding value of existing pent up market forces. Invention may seem sexy, but innovation may win the VC.

Perhaps worry less about inventing something "new" and more about innovating something the market demands and will find useful.

Apply

Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

Different

Many accelerators promote their mentor network as a key benefit, emphasizing the value of guidance for founders. While founders often seek this mentorship, it's important to recognize that coaching offers another powerful, and often overlooked, resource for both accelerators and founders.

Before deciding the support needed, understand what’s different between a mentor and a coach, and when each can help you make progress.

Mentor

A mentor is typically someone more experienced in your field or industry who offers guidance, advice, and perspective based on their own experience.

• Focus: Long-term personal and professional development.

• Style: Informal, conversational, and often includes personal stories.

• Relationship: Ongoing and relational, developing over time.

• Tools: Personal anecdotes, lessons learned, introductions within their network.

• Goal: To help navigate career paths, broaden thinking, and avoid common mistakes. Their advice reflects their own experiences.

Mentors may provide valuable insights and connections, helping to avoid common pitfalls. However, their advice is shaped by their own journey, and what worked for them might not be universally applicable due to evolving markets, technologies, and timing. Effective individuals listen, ask insightful questions, and discern what applies to their unique circumstances. Mentorship offers a valuable perspective, not a definitive plan.

Coach

A coach tends to be a trained professional focused on helping you achieve specific goals or overcome particular challenges, often without providing direct answers.

• Focus: Short- to medium-term performance improvement or goal achievement.

• Style: Structured, reflective, and often involves questioning.

• Relationship: Transactional or time-bound, often defined by a contract or a set number of sessions.

• Tools: Frameworks, exercises, action plans, and accountability check-ins.

• Goal: To help individuals unlock their own potential, gain clarity, and move forward.

Consider the analogy of Olympic athletes who have coaches even at the peak of their abilities. This isn't because they lack knowledge but because they need someone to push them, challenge their thinking, and support their best performance. The same principle applies to founders and others seeking to improve.

Conclusion

Both mentors and coaches offer significant value, but in distinct ways. Mentors provide insights based on their past experiences, while coaches help refine your thinking and address current challenges. The crucial aspect is identifying your immediate need: someone else's narrative or support in creating your own.

Understanding the difference and making a deliberate choice may determine whether you remain stagnant or achieve significant progress.

Apply

Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Investor Liaison Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

The Village

Behind every successful startup is a network of people whose roles extend far beyond what is seen in pitch decks or founder bios. Building a startup requires a village — a diverse group of individuals and communities working together to turn a founder’s vision into reality. But who makes up this village, and why is their support so critical to a founder's success?

The Core

At the core of a village comes family, a frequently overlooked but indispensable role. Spouses, parents, siblings and even close friends are frequently the first to believe in a founder’s dream. They sacrifice time with their loved one, provide emotional support during setbacks and offer encouragement, all of which can create a make-it-or-break-it difference.

The Team

At the heart of every thriving startup is the team. Early hires are the backbone of a startup, and their alignment with the founder's vision can make or break the company. These individuals wear multiple hats, work long hours and share in the uncertainty that comes with building something new. It’s these early believers who help translate big ideas into operational success.

The Advisors

At the heart of every thriving startup are advisors. These individuals provide the guidance founders need during pivotal moments, helping them avoid common pitfalls and make smarter decisions. Advisors may have walked dissimilar or similar paths, offering advice rooted in hard-earned experience. Their role isn’t to give the answers, but to advise founders with words of wisdom.

The Investors

Investors are integral to the village, offering more than funds to those ready, willing, and able to recognize it. Invaluable investors become strategic partners, providing opportunities, candid feedback and crucial credibility to a founder's vision. Capital is the shore; community and culture are the ocean.

• The shore represents a boundary, a finite edge. Capital, while essential for a startup to launch and operate, is ultimately a limited resource. There's a specific amount of investment raised, a runway defined by that capital, and a point where it can run out. The shore is tangible and necessary to access the ocean, but it is not the ocean itself.

• The ocean, in contrast, is vast, deep and seemingly limitless. It represents an expansive and ongoing flow – the network of mentors, advisors, fellow founders, early employees and overall ethos, with endless opportunity off in the horizon. This community and culture provides continuous learning, resilience, connections and a sense of belonging that can carry the startup far beyond the initial capital captured at port and out to sail open seas.

The Ecosystem

Finally, there’s the ecosystem. Co-working spaces, startup events and accelerators, etc., provide countless opportunities for connection and collaboration. Founders may find inspiration and ideas in conversations with other founders who are also navigating challenges. This bigger sense of community — of not being alone in the journey — may help entrepreneurs during tough times.

Don’t Underestimate

Despite the clear benefits, founders may underestimate the importance of the village and overestimate the raising of capital in isolation. Some hesitate to seek help, viewing it as a sign of weakness. Others may rely too heavily on one type of support, like investors, without diversifying their village to include mentors, peers or family. Building a strong village takes effort, intentionality and time. Relationships must be nurtured, trust earned and perspectives valued.

While a startup might begin as one person’s dream, its success relies on the collective strength of the village to which it belongs and contributes. Family, mentors, team members, investors and communities each play a vital role in turning an idea into a global success. By surrounding themselves with the right people, not merely amassing “followers,” founders may improve the odds and create an enriching journey filled with mutual joy.

Whether you’re a founder or part of a founder’s village, ask yourself not what the village can do for you, but what can you do for the village? Startups are a team sport. As in life, success is rarely achieved alone.

Apply

Ready to join a “village”? Please feel free to apply for funding via the following link.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to give feedback via the following link.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to follow the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage using the “Subscribe” button below.

Subscribe

Investor Prep

Fundraising isn’t easy. Support from an existing investor can be invaluable. During the fundraising process, potential investors may request meetings with individuals on your capitalization table (i.e., existing investors). This indicates interest and a desire to assess your qualities as a founder: resilience, ability to handle setbacks, communication skills, receptiveness to feedback and agility. Here are tips to help prepare yourself and your supporters for success.

Introduction

Make the Right Introduction: Select one or two investors with whom you have a strong, positive relationship. Ideally, choose someone who has witnessed both successes and challenges.

Notice

Provide Advance Notice: Inform your investors that they may be contacted, preventing any surprise. Provide context on the current status of discussions.

Points

Provide Talking Points: Instead of requesting a full investment memo, which some investors may be reluctant to share, offer a few bullet points for them to discuss or forward.

Ideas

Possible Talking Points:

• How you navigated a difficult decision or pivot.

• Your speed and responsiveness during a critical moment.

• Traction achieved with limited resources.

• Your ability to be coached and follow-through.

These points facilitate support through brief calls, email or conversations with other venture capitalists. Some investors are willing to assist with due diligence. Guide the narrative, provide clear information and minimize the effort required. This will create a positive impression on all parties involved.

Apply

Ready to apply for funding? Please feel free to use the button below to apply via Dealum to the Evolution Ventures MinervaFund.

Apply

Feedback

Please feel free to use the button below to give feedback to the Evolution Accelerator team.

Feedback

Subscribe

Please feel free to use the button below to subscribe to the “Startup Syntax” series by Hannah Savage.

Subscribe now

Why Not “First” or “Only”?

This week's edition of Startup Syntax will switch gears from wrong, worse and health to a relatively common mistake seen in early-stage startup pitches, namely, the overuse of two words: “first” and “only.” For example:

• “We’re the first platform to solve this.”

• “We’re the only company doing X.”

At first glance, these words might sound impressive. Founders use them to signal differentiation and market opportunity — the idea that they’ve found a truly unique problem and are the pioneers solving it.

Claiming you’re the first or only may raise more concerns than confidence.

Why “First” Is a Red Flag

Being first sounds exciting, but it rarely means what founders think it does. Very few successful companies were truly first to market. Facebook wasn’t the first social network. Google wasn’t the first search engine. Apple didn’t make the first smartphone.

If you’re truly first, investors worry about:

• Market readiness: Is there really demand for this yet?

• Cost of education: Will you spend all your resources teaching customers why they should care?

• Missed history: Are you aware of previous attempts that failed — and why?

Being first may be less important than being best, timely or the one who executes.

Why “Only” Rarely Holds Up

Saying you’re the only one solving a problem may mean you haven’t looked hard enough.

There’s almost always competition — whether direct or indirect.

Customers are solving the problem somehow, even if it’s with spreadsheets or duct-taped solutions.

Claiming “only” makes it sound like you skipped market research or don’t understand the landscape.

Even if your specific solution is novel, smart investors know that competition is a sign of a real market. If no one else is trying, they’ll wonder: Is the opportunity even there?

What to Try Instead

Investors aren’t looking for startups with no competition — they’re looking for founders who understand the competitive landscape and have a smart angle.

Try reframing with:

• “Here’s how we’re different from existing players.”

• “Current solutions fail because ___, and our approach is ___.”

• “We see the biggest opportunity in this underserved segment of the market.”

Show you’ve done your homework, understand the market and know where your wedge is, not that you’re building in a vacuum.

The Bottom Line

Being first or only is not a strategy — it’s a potential liability. What matters is why you win: your insight, your execution, your tech, your team, your timing.

If you’re pitching, skip the buzzwords and show investors you’ve thought deeply about the problem, the competition and your path to winning.

Apply

Ready to apply for funding? Please feel free to use the button below to apply via Dealum to the Evolution Ventures MinervaFund.

Apply now

Learn

Please feel free to use the button below to subscribe to the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage.

Subscribe now

Sacrifice

It's Friday. Time to reflect and recharge. In lieu of last week and the week before that perhaps its time to talk about sacrifice vs. sustainability.

There’s a narrative in startup culture that glorifies sacrifice: living on ramen, draining personal savings, maxing out credit cards—all to prove you’re "all in." Investors love the hustle, right?

Self-Sabotage

Let me be clear—sacrifice is part of the journey, but it shouldn’t cost you your health, your sanity or your basic needs. This isn’t resilience—it’s self-sabotage.

As investors, we absolutely want to back founders who can weather the inevitable storms. Building a company is hard. There will be moments that test your resolve, and yes, you’ll have to make trade-offs. Still, it’s time we evolve the conversation around what is reasonable to sacrifice.

✅ What's reasonable:

• Passing on a fancy office or big salary early on.

• Eating home-cooked meals instead of eating out.

• Skipping the annual vacation and opting for a staycation instead.

• Pivoting the product or solution based on early customer feedback, even if it means abandoning a significant amount of work.

• Postponing hiring a full-time marketing team and relying on freelance work.

🚫 What's not reasonable:

• Paying yourself so little that you're losing sleep over rent or groceries.

• Neglecting your health or mental well-being because "the company comes first."

• Believing your worth as a founder is tied to how much you're suffering.

Sustainability

You can't build something great if you're operating from survival mode. No investor should expect that from you. The oxygen mask rule applies—take care of yourself first so you have the capacity to lead.

Founders: It's OK to draw boundaries. Sustainability is not weakness. It's what allows you to show up fully, make smart decisions and build for the long haul.

We invest in people first—your ability to navigate challenges is tied directly to your mental clarity and overall well-being. Let's stop glorifying burnout and start normalizing balance, modesty and reasonableness that fuels sustainability.

Apply

Ready to apply for funding? Please feel free to use the button below to apply via Dealum to the Evolution Ventures MinervaFund.

Apply now

Learn

Please feel free to use the button below to subscribe to the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage.

Subscribe now

Friday

It's Friday again. Another week is in the books, as was the case last week. The core truth remains the same: If you didn’t quit this week and kept fighting, well done. Never underestimate the power of showing up.

Team

Last week, our team took some hits. This week? It took more and, in some ways, got worse. Two teammates’ sickness saga dragged on, and laryngitis was a fun new feature. Another awoke to the smell of a burning dryer. That’s right. A burning dryer. Well, OK, actually, per the technician, it was allegedly burning dryer ductwork, but still, the diagnosis was “wait a week” until someone finally has the time to fix it. Service at its best. Life at not its worst, but at least less dry.

And yet, drum roll please, when it came time for the Friday sync, without any coercion or real requirement, each team member rather unassumingly and unrelentingly showed up. As if showing up sick, tired and frustrated was normal.

Inevitable

Tough weeks are inevitable, and sometimes so are the even worse weeks that follow. Things are going to fall apart from time to time, and when they do, it’s even more important than ever to keep showing up and keep going. The point isn’t that people shouldn’t rest and recover when needed. The point isn’t some sort of extremism or unhealthy obsession with pain and suffering. This isn’t about irrational behavior or toxic teams or bad work cultures that don’t support appropriate time off.

The point is, finding a team of people that naturally opt to show up when and if possible, despite some bumps, is special. Showing up on the “ugly” days isn’t pretty, as perhaps one won’t be at their best not able to do their best work. However, those who survive truly extreme situations often push on when the situation looks very bleak, even hopeless. They simply won’t agree to quit easily. Sometimes surviving is the hardest part and also what matters the most.

To be clear, the team today met virtually via Zoom, so no wanton cross-contamination occurred, and one battered member admitted in a hoarse and raspy voice they wouldn’t have shown up in person. Which opens the way for another post someday about the power of working from home.

Lessons

Please remember you’re not alone. We face common problems. Humanizing the startup journey is important. It reminds us that AI may assist, but certainly hasn’t fixed all problems like getting sick and burning dryer vent.

Herein lies the opportunity for the gritty and determined. Those who make enduring and showing up a mantra may make for very special teams that will do very special things. Startups are about tough teams that face tough times together.

Here’s to conquering another week despite life. Here’s also to hoping next week will be more sun, more shine and dryer clothes. Even if it isn’t, let’s keep going.

Apply

Ready to apply for funding? Please feel free to use the button below to apply via Dealum to the Evolution Ventures MinervaFund.

Apply now

Learn

Please feel free to use the button below to subscribe to the “Startup Syntax” series by Hannah Savage.

Subscribe now

Life

Murphy’s Law. Migraines. Sick children. Faulty air conditioning unit that's a fire hazard (and, of course, isn’t covered by the home warranty). Life’s "fun" is infinite.

Startups

Startups aren’t built in perfect conditions. They’re built in chaos—when life happens, when plans unravel and when you're forced to figure things out on the fly. Investors don’t back founders who sail well only in smooth waters; they seek to back those who can navigate storm after storm.

Team

It’s Friday at the time of posting. Another week is in the books. For those who showed up and didn’t quit, well done. If this week life threw some "fun" your way, please know and remember that you’re not alone. The key isn’t avoiding problems per se—it’s learning to operate despite them. Another key is attracting, building, retaining and working with a gritty team that’s built to endure rough seas.

Lessons

No human is exempt from life. Pain and suffering are all too common, and that includes founders and investors. Keep showing up. Keep enduring together.

Teams matter. The laws of physics limit precious resources like time, money and influence. Build “Team Grit” wisely.

Apply

Ready to apply for funding? Please feel free to use the button below to apply via Dealum to the Evolution Ventures MinervaFund.

Apply now

Learn

Please feel free to use the button below to subscribe to the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage.

Subscribe now

Why

A common questions from founders after getting a “no” for funding is: “Why?”

Spending weeks or months perfecting your pitch, refining your deck, and pouring energy into an application, only to get a pass with seemingly little to no detailed or specific VC feedback may feel frustrating.

Yet, in some cases, VCs not providing detailed or personalized feedback to applicants may be intentional and actually rooted in well-meaning.

Subjective

Each investor has their own perspective, thesis, and biases, to name a few factors of difference. Just because one VC passes, it doesn’t mean others will. A “no” or “not right now” from one VC may be a “yes” from another VC that sees the world entirely differently. Not to mention, if a VC isn’t investing, why does the VC inherently have the right to dictate or disturb the direction of the business and its founding team by providing personalized, but nevertheless subjective feedback.

Market

Some may say the best feedback isn’t VC feedback after all. The best feedback is market feedback. Market driven metrics like customer count, overall traction, and revenue (i.e., ARR, MRR, NRR, etc.) are the real feedback worth paying attention to. The investors that actually invest versus merely “window shop” may be the relatively few VC that offer constructive commentary since they money at stake.

Skeptically

Some investors may give feedback simply for the sake of saying something that seems virtuous. Some may go so far as to tell you to change the business model, switch up your pricing, or pivot your entire strategy after a single meeting. Yet, sadly those same VC who freely doled out feedback may not even remember you or your company after giving a “thanks, but no thanks” to the deal. Perhaps take feedback more skeptically when:

• The investor doesn’t really invest in your industry or stage

• The investor requests changes that contradicts customers

• The investor seems to be justifying the “no”

Seriously

While some VC feedback may be worth exactly what you paid for it (i.e., $0), other VC feedback may not be noise. Perhaps take feedback more seriously when:

• Multiple investors point out the same issue (i.e., there’s a pattern)

• The investor has deep experience or expertise in your space and backs it with data

• The feedback aligns with concerns you already had, but couldn’t yet articulate

• They haven’t said “no” yet and are looking to continue the conversation

Lessons

Don’t quit. A pass from one investor may mean little to nothing in the grand scheme of things. There are perhaps many more options out there in the “sea” of VC.

Focus on traction. Proven success with customers and revenue ultimately outweighs theoretical VC feedback with or without investment.

Seek investors that align. Aligned investors will lean in and work with you to build the business together and root feedback in capital commitments. Please remember, while rejection is part of the VC process, don’t dwell on the “no”. Onward. Upward.

Apply

Ready to apply for funding? Please feel free to use the button below to apply via Dealum to the Evolution Ventures MinervaFund.

Apply now

Learn

Please feel free to use the button below to subscribe to the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage.

Subscribe now

Exits

At some point in your conversations with investors, the topic of exits will come up. Navigating this discussion requires balance. Some investors expect you to be thinking about exits from day one, seeing it as a sign that you have a long-term vision and a clear roadmap. Others may get uneasy if exit talk comes too soon, interpreting it as a sign that you're focused on a quick flip rather than building something enduring. And sometimes, when an investor asks about your exit strategy, it’s a red flag that they don’t fully understand what you’re building or how it fits into the market.

Regardless of the context, you should be prepared with a clear, well-reasoned perspective on potential exit scenarios. Comparables can be a valuable tool in these discussions, but choosing the right ones is critical. Misaligned or inflated comparisons can set unrealistic expectations both for investors and for yourself.

Hypothetically

Hypothetically speaking, Alex, the founder of Cloud Cakes, has created a premium organic take on Twinkies, made with real vanilla bean, pasture-raised eggs, and organic cane sugar. It has a cult following among health-conscious consumers and is sold at Whole Foods Market and Erewhon for $4.99 per cake.

While fundraising, Alex confidently tells investors:

"J.M. Smucker just acquired Twinkies for $5.6 billion. Given our traction, Cloud Cakes could follow a similar path."

At first glance, this sounds impressive. But investors who do their homework quickly realize Alex is overstating the comparable.

What Really Happened:

Smucker’s didn’t just buy Twinkies; they acquired Hostess Brands, which owns Twinkies, Ding Dongs, HoHos, and a full portfolio of snacks with nationwide distribution. The deal wasn’t about a single product. It was about acquiring a dominant, multi-brand company with decades of retail relationships and supply chain efficiencies.

Why This Comparison is Misleading:

• Cloud Cakes is one product, not a portfolio. The $5.6B deal wasn’t for just Twinkies, it was for an entire snack empire.

• Twinkies are a household name with mass distribution. Hostess snacks are sold everywhere, while Cloud Cakes is still a niche product in premium grocery stores.

• Different business models. Hostess owns its manufacturing and has deep retail partnerships, while Cloud Cakes relies on a co-packer and limited retail footprint.

How To Use Comparables Responsibly:

Comparably

Instead of inflating the exit potential, Alex may comparably say:

"Premium snack acquisitions like Tate’s Bake Shop ($500M) and RXBar ($600M) show there’s demand in this space. Given our traction and market fit, we see a realistic path toward a strategic acquisition in this range."

This keeps investor expectations grounded and builds credibility—because headline numbers don’t always tell the full story.

Lesson

Founders who communicate with clarity earn investor trust. You don’t necessarily need a hyped-up billion-dollar exit mapped out from the start, rather try to share a clear, credible, and comparable story. Use comparables wisely, focus on what sets you apart, and you’ll build the right investor relationships to win.

Apply for Funding and Pitch Deck Review:

Ready to take your startup to the next level? Apply for funding with a pitch deck via the Dealum platform: Evolution Ventures MinervaFund.

Learn More via Hannah Savage

Please feel free to use the button below to subscribe and learn more via the “Startup Syntax” series by Hannah Savage.

Subscribe now

Why Your Pitch Deck Matters

You are a founder diligently working to build your company, busy building your company. As an operator, your first priority is running your company, as it should be. You may think it's not worth your time putting energy into your pitch deck, but it is a really important tool. If you are seeking to raise capital — whether that be from a venture capitalist, private equity firm, investment bank, grants or even an SBA loan — you will have to show a viable and compelling business plan.

Beyond the First Meeting

A pitch deck isn’t only about securing a meeting, but it’s also used as an internal communication tool that can make or break the fundraising process. Have you ever played the game of telephone where the message at the end is almost never anything like the one at the beginning? This is what may happen after you have a call with an investor at a firm and they, in turn, communicate your vision to the rest of the team.

Alignment and Clarity

Spending time and money on a deck may seem like a distraction from your business and a nuisance. But it should be a tool to align the co-founders and the team on vision, strategy and execution. It also ensures consistent storytelling and may help you work through gaps in your business. You don’t need to be a great designer; that is something you may outsource, but you do need to spend time on content.

Apply for Funding and Pitch Deck Review:

Ready to take your startup to the next level? Apply for funding with a pitch deck via the Dealum platform: Evolution Ventures MinervaFund.

Learn More via Hannah Savage

Please feel free to use the button below to subscribe and learn more via the “Startup Syntax” series by Global Investor Hannah Savage.

Subscribe now