recently rated:

Rated by 44

3.8 3.5 3.2 3.4 3.2

3.4

Menlo Ventures

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

top rated funds:

Rated by 12

4.5 4.4 4.3 3.9 4.7

4.4

New Atlantic Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Reston, US East

Rated by 19

3.9 3.8 4.2 4.2 4.0

4.0

Maples Investments

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 12

4.2 4.1 4.1 3.6 4.0

4.0

Updata Partners

 

$$$$$ Red Bank, US East

Rated by 39

3.9 4.2 3.4 3.7 4.2

3.9

RRE Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 29

3.3 4.2 4.0 3.9 4.0

3.9

Leapfrog Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 55

3.9 3.9 3.8 3.5 4.0

3.8

First Round Capital

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 101

4.7 3.8 3.7 3.2 3.6

3.8

Sequoia Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 29

3.9 3.8 3.8 3.4 4.1

3.8

Altos Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 14

3.8 3.4 4.0 3.7 3.8

3.8

Aberdare Ventures

 

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 27

3.4 3.9 4.1 3.9 3.6

3.8

True Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 20

3.9 3.9 4.1 3.2 4.1

3.8

406 Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Boston, US East

Rated by 56

3.8 3.7 3.4 3.5 3.9

3.7

Trinity Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 16

3.6 3.5 3.8 3.5 3.5

3.6

August Capital

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 29

3.4 3.5 3.4 3.8 4.0

3.6

Clearstone Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Santa Monica, US West

Rated by 15

3.3 3.1 3.8 3.5 3.9

3.5

DFJ Mercury

Certified

$$$$$ Houston, US Central

Rated by 20

3.5 3.6 3.5 3.2 3.4

3.5

Wellington Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Munich, Europe

Rated by 11

3.6 3.8 3.0 3.2 3.7

3.5

Mangrove Capital Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Luxembourg, Europe

Rated by 41

3.6 3.3 3.4 3.2 4.0

3.5

Bessemer Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Larchmont, US East

Rated by 11

3.9 3.7 3.4 3.0 3.4

3.5

GRP Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Los Angeles, US West

Rated by 12

3.8 3.6 3.6 3.0 3.5

3.5

Meritage Funds

Certified

$$$$$ Denver, US West

Rated by 15

3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

3.5

Scale Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Foster City, US West

Rated by 38

3.4 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.6

3.4

Polaris Venture Partners

 

$$$$$ Waltham, US East

Rated by 25

3.1 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.4

3.4

Opus Capital

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 29

3.5 3.6 3.5 3.0 3.5

3.4

Union Square Ventures

 

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 26

4.0 3.6 2.8 3.0 3.4

3.4

Index Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Geneva, Europe

Rated by 44

3.8 3.5 3.2 3.4 3.2

3.4

Menlo Ventures

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 38

4.1 3.4 3.1 3.0 3.3

3.4

Greylock Partners

Certified

$$$$$ San Mateo, US West

Rated by 38

3.7 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3

3.4

Foundation Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 52

3.8 3.3 3.1 3.5 3.5

3.4

New Enterprise Associates

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 45

3.5 3.5 3.0 3.1 3.3

3.3

Mayfield Fund

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

HomeShowcaseTermsAdviceOpenDiscussCoFound

Sign-upHelpFor VCsFor MediaAdvertiseTop VCsBanned VCs

I pitched to the D'Arch Angels group in 2008 and 2009 during our fundraising process(es). After the first pitch in 2008 we made some progress both with development and raising government funds so we went back to them in mid-2009 to pitch again. We were ultimately turned down but the experience was extremely valuable. The investors didn't seem very interested, but asked really good questions, which helped us refine our pitch.

The experience in 2008 was really frustrating. Everything had to go through the Sr. Associate, Sam, who was really unresponsive but strung us along enough for us to think they were interested in further meetings.

The experience in 2009 was much better. By that time a new Sr. Associate, Dan, had taken over Sam's position and was genuinely interested in our presentation. He reviewed our materials in advance of the pitch session so that he could give us advice prior to the meeting to ensure we were very prepared. Prior to the pitch meeting we asked him where he thought our weaknesses were, and he was very candid about needing to address some holes in our management team. He also indicated that our schedule slips from 2008 to 2009 were concerning. By providing the feedback we were prepared to address these issues during our formal presentation. Following the pitch at NVG I pitched to a number of other investors in the area (it was 2009 and no one was investing anyway) but no one gave us the kind of feedback Dan did. Although they didn't invest, he was very clear about telling us why and did not string us along as everyone else in town did. Because of Dan's straight-forwardness, I'd definitely considering working with them in the future if I have a new company to fundraise for.

In 2007, we solicited proposals from multiple venture debt firms. WTI was responsive, straightforward to deal with and negotiated terms in a two week period of time. Diligence was also straightforward. They had higher warrant coverage than some, but most importantly, they had no cash covenant. When we needed to suspend principle repayment for a period of time in 2008, WTI was again responsive. They stood by us. The restructure was complete in about two weeks. We have repaid the debt fully and early. Relationships never got tense -- they were straight, fair, tough. Excellent partners.

Maurice Werdegar in particular is terrific. He understands his business thoroughly AND understands the cycles of venture backed companies. I’d definitely go back to WTI again. Highest recommendation.

I've been working with Liam for a while and have found him to be a true partner. He's incredibly nice, always generous with his time, and consistently supportive. He seems to have a knack for pattern matching with previous experiences and is impressively perceptive in dealing with subtle aspects of tough problems. Adds a ton of value. Knows the energy, healthcare, and education spaces well.

Primera helped us grow the business from the very early stages and up to the breakeven point almost three years later.

A few attributes that made them a perfect partner all these years:

- They move fast when needed and fair when negotiated with

- From the ongoing inputs, to the incredible contribution to our board – they are true professionals.

- Extremely well connected and don't hesitate to use their network when required.

But most important, they are not only experts but also great people.
I would recommend Primera above all other VCs I’ve dealt with.

I have pitched both Rory and Sharon at Scale (and back at B of A). I have always found them to be straightforward, smart, and not time wasters. Sharon in particular has been focusing on SaaS, social networking and other web 2.0 concepts for years. She provided me with good insights into how VCs evaluate SaaS metrics (this was a few years ago before there was broader agreement on the topics). Sharon has also made introductions that have helped us advance our business, and helped me network (and this was even though my business at that time did not fit their model). Sharon's success and support from entrepreneurs is indicative that she has treated many others the same way.

I found S3 to be quick to offer feedback and very hands-on in a helpful way once they've decided they like the market and the company. They are not a big organization, so they are fairly picky and the deal must hit one of their sweet spots, but they are a quick study and I found their direct communications and straight-shooter style to be far superior to many other VC's. They are not just another small Austin fund that piggybacks on other VC fundings as they have strong operational experience, deep connections and access to serious capital resources without the hidden agendas or committee decision making that often come with larger funds.

I would strongly suggest technology and medical entrepreneurs looking for capital in the region approach S3 in addition to others.

Everyone

I am starting to like the NY Times more and more, here is another article on NY VCs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/tec...

What really intrigued me about the NY scene was the different attitude of some of the VCs over there. Here is a cut and paste of the critical part:

"Dogpatch, which opened in January, offers start-ups a place to work, rent-free, for several months, along with the possibility of securing an investment down the line."

Note : "Dogpatch" is not the only one who is seemingly doing this.

They provide a forum where de-risking of the start up takes place. And that is what is needed so terribly in the Valley. I don't know of many Valley VCs who do it.

Now, what "Dogpatch" offers only goes part way. A place to rest while you do the ground level investigation. What the NY VCs don't seem to do is advance a 250,000 cheque and then a 500,000 cheque to really ground the business.

De risking a business is more than just putting a business plan together on some mashup idea. It involves proofs of concept, IP, business case development, marketing channel development, monetization development, team building.

And that 250,000 is real venturing. (so too, may be the 500,000 cheque after that).

You won't really know that you really have something until a good 6 months to a year of time has gone in, along with 250 to 750 in hard money.

Any idiot can finance a MSFT after it has a whole bunch of customers. The problem for the "idiots" is that by then it is too late.

At that point, the start up has 50 options and can afford to "digitally signal" ... "those who wait and wait and wait" .... that they are number one.

Real VC work will involve building a de risking capability as part of the fund.

The times .... they are a'changing.

best wishes

Jon Callagan has an almost unnerving level of charisma and charm. Not fake charisma either. He's a genuinely down to earth, likeable guy. And smart too!