recently rated:

Rated by 41

2.5 2.6 2.6 2.8 2.4

2.6

General Catalyst

 

$$$$$ Cambridge, US East

top rated funds:

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 17

3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.2

3.4

Scale Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Foster City, US West

Rated by 27

3.6 2.9 2.9 3.9 3.2

3.3

The Founders Fund

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

Rated by 15

3.8 3.1 2.9 3.2 3.6

3.3

Azure Capital Partners

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 10

3.2 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.4

3.3

Adams Capital Management, Inc.

 

$$$$$ Sewickley, US East

Rated by 10

3.6 3.4 3.2 3.0 3.2

3.3

Noro-Moseley Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Atlanta, US East

Rated by 38

3.0 3.6 3.3 3.0 3.5

3.3

Hummer Winblad Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ San Francisco, US West

Rated by 23

3.3 3.4 3.0 3.4 3.3

3.3

Allegis Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 48

3.6 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.7

3.3

Bessemer Venture Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Larchmont, US East

Rated by 39

3.6 3.4 3.3 3.1 3.3

3.3

Foundation Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 34

3.4 3.5 3.2 3.2 3.4

3.3

InterWest Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 14

3.6 3.5 3.5 2.8 3.4

3.3

Meritage Funds

Certified

$$$$$ Denver, US West

Rated by 47

3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.2

3.2

Mayfield Fund

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 10

2.6 3.4 3.6 3.2 2.9

3.2

Palomar Ventures

 

$$$$$ Santa Monica, US West

Rated by 25

3.4 3.1 3.0 3.3 3.1

3.2

Sigma Partners

 

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 31

3.1 3.1 2.9 3.2 3.4

3.2

BlueRun Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 33

2.9 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.2

3.2

Opus Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 13

3.0 2.6 3.8 3.3 3.1

3.2

Kepha Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Waltham, US East

Rated by 10

3.6 3.5 3.2 2.2 3.5

3.2

Sequoia Capital Israel

 

$$$$$ Oceanos Hotel, ..., ME / Africa

Rated by 26

3.3 3.3 3.3 2.6 3.1

3.1

Union Square Ventures

 

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 14

3.4 3.2 3.5 2.8 2.4

3.1

Trident Capital

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 29

3.6 3.2 2.8 3.1 2.8

3.1

Draper Fisher Jurvetson Gotham Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ New York, US East

Rated by 42

3.8 3.1 2.8 3.1 2.6

3.1

Accel Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 20

3.4 2.8 3.1 3.3 2.9

3.1

Sutter Hill Ventures

Certified

$$$$$ Palo Alto, US West

Rated by 22

3.3 3.4 3.2 2.5 3.1

3.1

Emergence Capital Partners

Certified

$$$$$ San Mateo, US West

Rated by 13

3.5 3.2 3.6 3.0 2.1

3.1

Balderton (Benchmark EU)

Certified

$$$$$ London, Europe

Rated by 51

3.4 2.6 3.0 3.1 2.8

3.0

Draper Fisher Jurvetson

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US West

Rated by 23

3.7 2.6 2.9 2.7 3.0

3.0

Matrix Partners

Certified

$$$$$ Menlo Park, US East

HomeShowcaseTermsAdviceOpenDiscussCoFound

Sign-upHelpFor VCsFor MediaAdvertiseTop VCsBanned VCs

Firm Rating:

Firm Homepage:

I pitched David Spector recently. He has been with Sequoia for about two years so I'm happy to write his first review on TheFunded. Note: It was an impromptu pitch and demo and David had no materials beforehand, so keep that in mind. My takeaways:

- He's a sharp guy. Asked good questions about our product and business model and paid close attention to my words.
- He offered concrete suggestions on what it would take to attract his and Sequoia's interest specific to my company.
- He is open. I asked him all manner of direct questions and he replied with direct answers.

Net: David is smart, direct and has a sense of humor. I felt crystal clear on where things stood and next steps.

I will have a meeting next month with them, so this is more of a question than comment. Warren Hogarth graciously agreed to meet for establishing a connection, even though he was honest upfront that they would not be interested in an early-stage deal that is outside the Bay Area.

Obviously, I know that Sequoia's reputation is fantastic, but do not know enough about them to even begin to contemplate a move. Feedback will be highly appreciated; details in the private section.

I enjoy pitching Sequoia for one simple reason. They are the purest form of greed on Sand Hill Road. If you have something that fits their model, few VC's will do more to help make that a reality, including stepping all over you (which, BTW, they should if you slow it down).

The Sequoia pitch is simple:

1) What it does.
2) Which of the 7 deadly sins does it serve. Yes, this is actually part of their screening. All great investments fundamentally feed one of the 7 deadly sins, which in turn creates an internal need to use it and share it with others. It's not stupid, it's genius. Just a little short on the ethical spectrum.
3) How it grows 1000x per year. Yes, that's the growth rate of their best investments over the last 20 years. Don't think of this as an elitest criterium, think of it as a challenge for you to see the highest growth areas of your business.
4) Data that backs up 2 and 3.

If you have something growing like mad, pitch Sequoia. If you have a hunch and some theories, don't bother unless you can build something that proves it in less than 30 days.

Sequoia doesn't want to be your friend. They want to get rich. You can decide whether or not that's what you want, but they will be that voice for sure.

Pitched Michael Moritz whom I pitched in 2007 on a different deal. He was quick to review and declined due to a conflict with another investment.

At first, I was shocked to learn that Sequoia was part of a private equity consortium that bought First Republic Bank. Then, upon further thought, it's no surprise that top venture capitalists would start to abandon the venture capital model first...

-- http://bit.ly/1dwhWq

Has venture investing gotten that bad? I know that top venture funds have the authority to do all types of deals, including public market investments. It makes sense for VCs to try and make money however they can, so I get buying a publicly traded technology company or even taking some innovative traditional businesses private, like a newspaper with a good online division.

BUT, buying a bank? Where is the innovation?

Gents,
Has Sequoia ever done a successful funding in Australia? Many of the US companies we've followed have funding origins in the USA but we're finding it hard to find a serious backer locally.

Pitched several of their team members. It felt like they have seen it all.

Sequoia Capital's investment strategy is very simple - the product/service has to serve a very large market. They can fix everything else (replace management, keep developing the product, etc.) but they can not fix the market. If you want to pitch them - make sure that your story shows a huge market for your offering.

Has any one worked with him before"

We were bounced around the firm for our initial pitch and landed on Joe Dobrenski. Lesson learned, only pitch a real player in the firm.

Joe was a nice enough guy (I suppose), but a complete waste of our time. He was really really really late and then hurried us along. No eye contact or attempt to engage in a meaningful discussion. Bolted for the door after 20 minutes.

If anyone sells Dale Carnegie classes... please call on Sequoia Capital and sell them the basic intro course on how to win friends and influence people.

Lots of meetings resulting in a suggestion to refocus the business on just a few current customers. Why would I need venture funding for that"

The Partner that we were scheduled to meet with (through a referral) was 30+ minutes late. He rushed us through almost every pitch slide in our presentation. As he hurried out of the room after 25 minutes he kept saying, "Let's stay in touch. Let's stay in touch".

Really bad form

Was initially pleasantly surprised to be scheduled for a full 1.5 hours for our pitch, a luxurious time frame...however, was not at all surprised (despite rumors that there had been a crack down in this area) to find that the scheduled time did not match reality. We began 30 minutes later than scheduled, due to the late arrival of the Sequoia partner.

Most of the partners at Sequoia are top-drawer. But a sour apple in the barrel can make it a harder decision for seasoned entrepreneurs to choose Sequoia.

How the meetings usually go is standard among most VC. Make sure you know your market and have focus. Execution is #1 so know exactly how you have/will win customers, market share and make money.

The slogan on their site and back of their cards is "The Entrepreneurs Behind Entrepreneurs" - it's true. All the folks I've spoken with have operating experience and one partner, who sits on 5 boards, is actually acting CEO for one of the companies, actively seeking his replacement to help the company grow.

A small tip. Before you take a meeting with Someone commented that VC's have a play book, they all pretty much ask the same questions. It's very nice to know what to expect before you walk in the door with these guys.

So, what's that "play book" of questions"

These guys earn their reputations - good decisions fast.

They have two partners for each deal -- for privacy reasons I will decline to name the two partners on our deal. Mr. X has been very responsive and straight with us, an early stage venture spawned at MIT (we have no slick MBAs or presentation yet). Mr. Y was really cool too -- unlike lesser VCs that nag about our lack of a team, these guys really focused upon the consumer experience. However, getting beyond the talk to a deal was not (yet) possible for us. Look at their track record and not at their website's claims about "very early stage" 100K deals. All their recent deals are post-Beta w/ >$3million. That said, they are very responsive and give good advice. They are actually really conservative -- they'll get in when it's a sure thing.

Even though our company ended up taking funding from another VC, our experience with Sequoia in general, and Roelof in particular, was extraordinarily positive. I came in half-expecting to be eaten alive, given some of the stories, but the partners were attentive listeners, kind, and gave wise and sensible feedback. I'd think with their kind of track record they'd be more standoffish, but I was pleasantly disarmed. Good guys!

Sequoia is a great partner, and will come to a decision quickly. One thing that sticks with them is ability to grow big. They do not want small (<$100M) exits, and will gauge founders views on this notion. Plans need to have long term view toward market building and revenue.

Focus is on building things that can be worth $1B or more (otherwise, not worth their time...) Bring discipline and unbeatable rolodex to the table.

DO NOT make Sequoia your first pitch. Tighten up your story by spending time pitching other venture firms first; *then* go to Sequoia.