recently rated:

Rated by 15

4.4 4.2 3.9 4.2 4.0

4.1

Andreessen Horowitz

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

top rated funds:

Rated by 15

4.4 4.2 3.9 4.2 4.0

4.1

Andreessen Horowitz

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 16

3.8 4.5 4.0 3.8 4.2

4.0

Rincon Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Santa Barbara, CA, US West

Rated by 43

3.6 3.8 4.2 4.2 3.8

3.9

True Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 11

3.9 4.2 3.2 3.6 4.0

3.8

Mangrove Capital Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Luxembourg, Europe

Rated by 45

3.8 4.1 3.3 3.7 4.0

3.8

RRE Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 107

4.7 3.8 3.7 3.1 3.6

3.8

Sequoia Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 33

3.9 3.8 3.8 3.4 4.1

3.8

Altos Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 32

4.0 4.1 4.0 2.8 4.1

3.8

406 Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Boston, US East

Rated by 64

3.9 3.8 3.8 3.4 3.9

3.7

First Round Capital

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 23

3.6 3.5 4.0 3.6 3.9

3.7

DFJ Mercury

Certified

$$$$$ Houston, US Central

Rated by 27

3.8 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.6

3.7

FLOODGATE

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 13

3.7 3.8 3.8 3.4 3.8

3.7

IDG Ventures SF

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 11

3.6 3.7 3.6 3.8 3.4

3.6

Flywheel Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Santa Fe, US West

Rated by 19

3.7 3.6 3.8 3.5 3.5

3.6

August Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 10

4.0 3.8 3.9 2.8 3.7

3.6

Updata Partners

 

$$$$$ Red Bank, US East

Rated by 64

3.8 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.9

3.6

Trinity Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 15

2.9 3.6 3.8 3.3 3.8

3.5

Merus

 

$$$$$ US West

Rated by 21

3.5 3.6 3.6 3.2 3.4

3.5

Wellington Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Munich, Europe

Rated by 12

3.2 3.6 3.4 3.0 4.2

3.5

DN Capital

 

$$$$$ London, Europe

Rated by 30

3.3 3.4 3.3 3.7 3.7

3.5

Clearstone Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Santa Monica, US West

Rated by 28

3.7 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.3

3.4

The Founders Fund

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 49

3.7 3.4 3.1 3.4 3.2

3.4

Menlo Ventures

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 16

3.9 3.7 2.9 2.9 3.6

3.4

Versant Ventures

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 10

3.6 3.4 3.9 2.7 3.3

3.4

DFJ Esprit

Certified

$$$$$ London, Europe

Rated by 13

3.0 3.8 3.5 3.2 3.4

3.4

Fidelity Growth Partners Europe

Certified

$$$$$ London, Europe

Rated by 16

3.9 3.6 3.1 2.9 3.5

3.4

GRP Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Los Angeles, US West

Rated by 61

3.8 3.3 3.0 3.5 3.4

3.4

New Enterprise Associates

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 17

3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.2

3.4

Scale Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Foster City, US West

Rated by 18

3.2 3.4 3.3 3.0 3.6

3.3

Blumberg Capital

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 39

3.4 3.4 2.9 3.4 3.5

3.3

Polaris Venture Partners

 

$$$$$ Waltham, US East

HomeShowcaseTermsAdviceOpenDiscussCoFound

Sign-upHelpFor VCsFor MediaAdvertiseTop VCsBanned VCs

Prior to accepting capitla from any fund that will require board representation, one should be sure to spend some time doing background checks on the new boardmember(s). Find out what industry they came from (finance, technology, consulting etc.), check out the quality of their other portfolio investments, and be sure to interview CEO's of those portfolio companies to find out how the investor has contributed (or not) to the BOD. Chances are that you will be stuck with your boardmembers for some time, and it's good to know who you are getting into bed with prior to making any decisions.

So, I have wavered between "War and Peace" and the one page agenda for Board meetings. I stand somewhere in the middle. In my humble opinion, less is more, and here is what I recommend: (1) Agenda Page, (2) Minutes, (3) Dashboard, (4) Budget vs Actual, and (5) Business Discussion Points. Throw a cap table and financial back-up in a couple appendices (and make sure to update your cumulative dividends). Members, read on...

You should always be in control of your own board. There is a simple way to do this, stack your board with people that are beyond reproach that are in your corner. Yes, you need to be well connected to pull this off but if do, you could end up with at least an even say on the board. Most entrepreneurs get board members from referrals, I say, get your friends! Don't get 100 board members, just a few that no one can tell you to get rid of...After-all you just gave them free stock...so they'll probably back you at least for the first year. However, don't get rubber stamp people that won't do anything. Make sure to get people that actually will be active.

There are a lot of postings here about getting the initial term sheet and getting the VC on board. However, just like marriages, many of these courting periods can be quite different from the month to month evolving operations and business that we face a year or two down the road. Remember that often these VCs will sit on your board, and direct your business in different ways and depending on your dilution can dictate how operational decisions should be made. Thus, it is important to get an early feel from your VC dialogue, especially how they would respond if the actual business is less than the wonderful picture we sometimes paint in our pitches.

Even with the best of intentions, it is possible and even probable that the world does not quite turn out the way that we have carefully planned. Having VCs with real operational experience could actually prove to be useful in this setting. However, having attorneys or other less experienced associates on the board can be disastrous as they can and will send the management team on useless exercises to appease their ignorance and waste valuable time and resources that could be focused on the real business issues.

It is also important to set realistic expectations on how a business will evolve as this can determine the tone of the ongoing dialogue. I was involved with a CEO who promised rosy but unlikely-to-happen scenarios and thus the board was often in an antagonistic and negative stance with the whole management team.

While we all need to be as careful and realistic as possible with the expectations that we set, we also need to be careful about the kind of people we let on our boards as this can become a regular drag and distraction that we do not need when we are building a business.

Basically, never let a VC to skip taking a board seat because this means they might be an evidence they want an option to dump the startup or do a Round A on miserable terms.

http://www.greggretsch.com/2010/05/do...