Fundraising is Like a Strange Dance: The 'Absurd Drama' of Silicon Valley Founders' Capital Raises

marsbitPublished on 2026-06-09Last updated on 2026-06-09

Abstract

The article details a series of absurd and revealing anecdotes shared by Silicon Valley founders about their venture capital fundraising experiences, sparked by Greg Isenberg's story of pitching to a sleeping a16z partner. Founders describe surreal pitch meetings: one faced a barefoot, peanut-eating investor who offered triple the requested amount after 30 seconds; another performed a pitch in a VC's parked car; a founder discovered his audience understood no English beyond "yes." These stories highlight the often irrational and performative nature of fundraising. Beyond the absurdity, darker power imbalances are exposed. Stories include investors suggesting founders fire co-founders for their equity, blatant market misjudgments, disrespectful behavior from LPs, and discriminatory remarks. A debate also emerges around "Sequoia's" practice of splitting a round into two valuations. However, the thread isn't solely critical. Positive counter-narratives celebrate supportive VCs who offered crucial advice during crises, respected founders' timelines, and showed simple gestures of respect—like a partner personally fetching coffee before a major pitch. Ultimately, the collective sharing acts as a pressure release, illustrating that fundraising is a complex dance of power, trust, and sometimes sheer theater. It underscores that beyond capital, mutual respect and integrity remain the most enduring foundations of the founder-investor relationship.

By: Zen, PANews

An a16z partner fell asleep on the spot for over 30 minutes, and you have to grit your teeth and finish presenting your Series A materials, worth $15 million, to a person who is "unconscious"... This sounds like dark humor, but it's a real VC pitch story experienced by Greg Isenberg, founder of Late Checkout and LCA.

Last week, after Greg Isenberg shared this experience on X, it quickly resonated within the Silicon Valley startup community.

"This is venture capital," Isenberg said, noting that founders sometimes fly across the entire country just to "perform" for a group of people who aren't necessarily alert. Fundraising is like a dance; sometimes the founder leads, sometimes follows, and sometimes the dance partner is already asleep.

He believes almost every founder has a similar story, but people rarely talk about them publicly because they might need to raise funds again in the future and can't afford to offend VCs. In fact, Isenberg did not name the specific firm, only saying it was a top-three venture capital firm. In the end, it was the sleeping partner himself—Marc Andreessen of a16z—who proactively admitted to the embarrassing incident, jokingly blaming it on founders in San Francisco who kept telling him he should try "psychedelics."

After Isenberg fired the "first shot," many other founders and investors have come forward to share their own personal experiences during the fundraising process.

Absurd Moments in the Pitch Room

The reason Isenberg's rant spread quickly and prompted more entrepreneurs to share is that he revealed a side of the fundraising process that is rarely described publicly. In the common imagination, a project pitch should be a rational, efficient, and respectable business negotiation among elites, but in reality, it's not always the case.

The story of Airwallex Co-founder and CEO Jack Zhang is one of the most vivid scenes.

During the most feverish period of the SoftBank Vision Fund, Jack once flew over 30 hours from Melbourne to London to pitch while running a 39°C fever. However, the investor arrived late, walking into the conference room completely barefoot after being 90 minutes behind schedule.

As Jack began his formal presentation, the other party opened a bag of peanuts, chewing while listening. About 30 seconds later, the investor interrupted him to ask how much he wanted to raise. Jack answered $100 to $150 million. The investor directly said, "I'll give you $300 million. We can make you the industry leader." The entire meeting ended just 20 minutes later. Jack later joked that the time it took him to get from Heathrow Airport to the office was longer than this pitch that determined his company's future.

This story of the "Barefoot Sage" immediately made Y Combinator partner Tom Blomfield feel addressed. He said he might have met the same person, as the individual had picked his feet, eaten with his hands, smoked during a meeting, and finally stubbed out the cigarette in his lunch, then poured coffee on it to put it out.

However, Blomfield himself has also left a deep impression on pitching entrepreneurs with some "quirky" behavior. Starcloud Co-founder and CEO Philip Johnston claimed that during a Zoom pitch, one partner spent the entire time tossing peanuts into the air, catching them in his mouth, and then crunching on them. Blomfield frankly admitted that partner was himself and humorously replied, "I thought we agreed we wouldn't talk about your YC interview."

Besides these more recent next-gen pitches, Uber Co-founder and former CEO Travis Kalanick also came out to reminisce about his own anecdote from as early as 2001. Before a scheduled meeting was about to start, Kalanick intercepted a partner who was trying to escape outside the VC's office, and ultimately completed the pitch in the passenger seat of the partner's parked Lexus. Midway, the partner's large belly pressed against the steering wheel, and he grabbed Kalanick's laptop to quickly flip through the PPT himself. Kalanick left only one sigh: "Fundraising in 2001, it really had a special feel."

Other stories are more like black comedies born from misaligned language and situations. Sphere Labs Co-founder Dirichlet was once asked by an existing investor to pitch to an ultra-high-net-worth individual with a fortune exceeding $10 billion, who also managed a large fund, during a dinner.

The introducer reminded him: "His English isn't great, but you still need to give him a good pitch." So Dirichlet spent 30 to 45 minutes introducing the company slowly and in simplified terms. The other party kept nodding, occasionally saying "Yes," and even ordered a dessert in fairly decent English. It wasn't until after the dinner ended, with handshakes and hugs, that he learned the other person didn't actually understand a single English word except for "Yes" and the Greek yogurt on the menu.

More Glaring than the Absurdity is the Power Dynamic

If bare feet, eating peanuts, and car pitches still carry a certain comic flair, other stories fully expose the inequality in the fundraising relationship.

Cloudflare Co-founder and CEO Matthew Prince mentioned that Cloudflare was once rejected early on by a Sequoia partner because the other party didn't believe women could lead a security infrastructure company.

Another time, he was introduced to a16z Co-founder Marc Andreessen, thinking it was just a casual meeting, but Andreessen thought it was a formal pitch and brought the entire a16z partnership team. When someone pointed out he "didn't seem prepared," Prince admitted it was true because he genuinely hadn't prepared, and he ultimately framed that rejection letter.

Prince also added a story about Khosla Ventures founder Vinod Khosla. When Cloudflare was preparing its Series C round, Khosla had given a term sheet and invited Prince, along with the other two co-founders, Michelle Zatlyn and Lee Holloway, to dinner.

Near the end of the dinner, as Michelle and Lee left for the restroom, Khosla leaned over and told Prince that he was impressed with Prince but wasn't as optimistic about the other two co-founders. If Prince was willing to fire them, he could give their equity to Prince. Prince believed the kindest interpretation was that it might have been a character test, but he was still deeply offended and subsequently blocked Khosla.

The story of Flexport Founder and CEO Ryan Petersen involves some inexplicable market misjudgment. During one pitch, a well-known VC told them the global logistics market was only $6 billion (in reality, it's trillions). This absurd number prompted his CFO to retort on the spot: "So you're saying this market is smaller than the USB cable market?"

Figma AI lead Ted Benson also recounted his awkward experience. During his first startup, he flew to Redmond. Mid-meeting, a VP suddenly interrupted him, asking, "Why am I talking to you? Who do you know that got this meeting on my calendar?" Then added: This isn't going anywhere, but you have 15 minutes left, want to just chat?

On more specific funding structures, Mercor CEO Brendan Foody pointed the finger at the so-called "Sequoia scam." He claimed that in the past 6 months, he had seen several cases where Sequoia entered the same funding round with two tranches of capital at two different valuations, but the market narrative only emphasized the higher valuation, which founders then passed on to employees and angel investors.

Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire later responded, saying similar situations had happened about 5 times in the 7 years since he joined Sequoia, but he believed calling it a scam was unfair. His explanation was that for hot companies, especially AI companies, other investors were willing to pay prices far above Sequoia's judgment. Therefore, Sequoia tried to separate "company-building partnership" from "capital price," ultimately resulting in two investments with different valuations close in time. He emphasized that VC is a long-term game, and intentionally misleading doesn't align with long-term interests.

This power dynamic doesn't only exist between VCs and entrepreneurs but also between LPs and VCs. Equal Ventures Founder and Managing Partner Rick Zullo recalled that when raising his first fund, an LP demanded a meeting at 7 a.m. on a Monday, just two days after his daughter was born. The LP was 45 minutes late, listened to the meeting while eating a breakfast burrito, and finally said he wasn't planning to make any new investments.

Someone commented that this is the downward transmission of abuse: LPs belittle GPs, GPs belittle founders, and founders then belittle non-founders. Zullo responded that there's no reason for this cycle to exist. Just because someone was once an asshole to you doesn't mean you have the right to be an asshole to others.

When Investors Truly Side with the Founder

However, this chain reaction sparked by Isenberg wasn't just a collective indictment of VCs. Many founders also mentioned that in the world of fundraising, there are also investors who are genuinely willing to help the company, respect the founders, and even change the company's fate at critical moments.

For example, the Vinod Khosla who tried to "drive a wedge" in the story above presents a completely different image in other entrepreneurs' accounts.

Startup Grind and Bevy Co-founder Derek Andersen recalled that in May 2017, he was just 6 weeks away from running out of cash. One early morning, he told his wife on the couch that he was almost out of money and might lose everything. His wife simply said, "You'll figure it out." So he spent the whole night sending emails, praying, and at 1:39 a.m., sent an email to Khosla, whom he had only interviewed a few times at Startup Grind and wasn't close with.

At 7:34 a.m., Khosla replied to the email, asked for a phone number, and called him later while on his way to a meeting. Andersen said the advice and encouragement from that call helped him raise $1 million within those 6 weeks, ultimately saving the company.

Linear Co-founder and CEO Karri Saarinen provided another, more complete positive example. He said he hadn't encountered too many bad things about VCs; the worst usually was just the other party being very polite but clearly uninterested.

After founding Linear, he deliberately kept the company in a state of "not needing to raise funds," not casually accepting pitches, and only proceeding when both sides had genuine interest. When Sequoia first asked to meet him, he clearly stated he wasn't fundraising but still brought materials to meet more partners. After the pitch, they asked how much he planned to raise, and he again stated he wasn't fundraising. A few weeks later, when Linear truly decided to raise, Sequoia competed with other interested VCs and ultimately led the seed round.

Similar positive memories also appear in the stories of founders from Figma, Nansen, and Profound.

Figma Co-founder and CEO Dylan Field recalled that when Figma raised its seed round in 2013, most people didn't understand the product, but most of the people he met were very friendly. Reddit Co-founder Alexis Ohanian also came forward to admit that missing Figma was his own misjudgment. Because several similar products had failed before, he mistakenly thought no one could succeed in this direction.

Nansen Co-founder and CEO Alex Svanevik also said that over the years, he had met over 100 VCs, and positive experiences far outweighed negative ones.

Profound Co-founder and CEO James Cadwallader remembered that last year before his Series B pitch at Sequoia's Menlo Park office, partner Alfred Lin asked him if he needed anything. He said he wanted coffee, and a few minutes later, Alfred Lin personally brought back the coffee, without calling an assistant or handing it to someone else. It was just a very small gesture, but before a tense meeting that determined whether funding would proceed, it was enough for a founder to remember for a long time.

In the end, this Silicon Valley-style chain of fundraising stories doesn't present a simple conclusion of whether VCs are good or bad. It's more like a collective pressure release for the startup fundraising ecosystem. Founders recount those absurd, rude, and even humiliating moments, revealing that fundraising is never just about matching capital with projects; it's also a complex interaction revolving around information, status, trust, and control.

But these stories also show that the relationship between founders and investors doesn't have to be this way. Good investors may not always back every company or offer the highest valuation, but they at least treat the entrepreneur sitting across from them seriously, understanding the long-term effort and preparation behind a pitch.

Respect and trust that go beyond capital and valuation are the most enduring undertones in Silicon Valley's startup stories.

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QWhat are some absurd moments during fundraising pitches shared by Silicon Valley entrepreneurs?

AEntrepreneurs shared several absurd moments: a16z's Marc Andreessen fell asleep for over 30 minutes during a pitch; a SoftBank Vision Fund investor arrived 90 minutes late, barefoot, and offered $300 million after just 30 seconds; an investor ate peanuts and crushed a cigarette into his lunch; another tossed peanuts in the air and caught them in his mouth during a Zoom call; and a founder pitched in a VC's parked car after the partner tried to escape the meeting.

QWhat examples illustrate the power imbalance in founder-VC relationships?

AExamples include: a Sequoia partner rejecting Cloudflare partly because they didn't believe a woman could lead a security infrastructure company; Vinod Khosla suggesting Cloudflare's CEO fire his co-founders to get their equity; a VC claiming the global logistics market was only $6 billion (versus trillions); a Microsoft VP asking a founder 'Why am I even talking to you?'; and an LP making a VC pitch at 7 AM shortly after his child was born, then showing up late and declining to invest.

QWhat positive experiences did founders share about their interactions with venture capitalists?

APositive experiences include: Vinod Khosla giving crucial advice that helped save Startup Grind/Bevy with a $1M raise; Sequoia's Alfred Lin personally fetching coffee for a founder before a pitch; Sequoia proceeding respectfully when Linear initially wasn't fundraising and later leading their seed round; and founders from Figma and Nansen noting that most VCs they met were kind and professional, even when passing on investment.

QWhat was the 'Sequoia scam' accusation mentioned, and how did a Sequoia partner respond?

AMercor's CEO accused Sequoia of a 'scam' where it invested in two tranches at different valuations in the same round, but public narratives only highlighted the higher valuation. Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire responded that this rare practice (about 5 times in 7 years) occurs when other investors are willing to pay much higher prices. Sequoia aims to separate being a 'company-building partner' from 'capital price,' leading to two closely timed investments at different valuations. He argued intentionally misleading founders doesn't serve long-term VC interests.

QAccording to the article, what is the underlying theme of these fundraising stories?

AThe stories reveal that fundraising is not just a rational capital-allocation process but a complex dance of information, status, trust, and power. While many absurd and disrespectful moments highlight inherent imbalances, the collective sharing acts as a pressure release. The concluding theme is that the relationship doesn't have to be adversarial. The most enduring foundation in Silicon Valley is respect and trust that go beyond capital and valuation, demonstrated by investors who treat founders seriously and understand the effort behind each pitch.

Related Reads

After Three Consecutive Quarters of Decline, Can the Crypto Market Find a Window for Stabilization in Q3?

The cryptocurrency market has just concluded its worst-performing quarter since 2022, with total capitalization dropping 12.6% to $2.1 trillion. All core metrics indicate capital is leaving the sector, not just rotating within it. Bitcoin fell 14.2% and Ethereum dropped 25.4% in Q2, breaking their previous correlation with US tech stocks. A key driver is the reversal in US spot Bitcoin ETF flows, which saw a net outflow of approximately $4.67 billion in Q2, including a record monthly outflow near $4.5 billion in June. While recent data suggests long-term holders are accumulating again, sustained ETF outflows mean continued selling pressure. Market focus is now singularly on the Federal Reserve. The upcoming July FOMC meeting is seen as the most critical event for Q3. A dovish signal could support Bitcoin reclaiming a $68,000-$84,000 range, while a hawkish stance might establish a new trading band around $50,000-$56,000. Additionally, regulatory uncertainty persists, with the progress of the crucial *CLARITY Act* stalling in the Senate, reducing its perceived 2026 passage probability to 40-45%. Despite the broad downturn, a few sectors showed growth. Prediction markets saw nominal volume surge 48.7% year-over-year to $113.8 billion, and tokenized collectibles transaction volume rose 143% quarterly to $1.4 billion. The Real-World Asset (RWA) tokenization sector also continued steady growth, now representing ~$28.1 billion in on-chain value. The market's foundation for an extreme crash appears limited, with Bitcoin price hovering near its 200-week moving average. However, the trading paradigm has shifted from narrative-driven speculation to decisions based on price action, policy developments, and interest rate expectations, making a broad sentiment-driven rally unlikely in the near term.

marsbit2h ago

After Three Consecutive Quarters of Decline, Can the Crypto Market Find a Window for Stabilization in Q3?

marsbit2h ago

BIT Trading Moment: BTC Still Suppressed by Weekly 200 EMA, Rejection May Restart Decline; Storage and Semiconductors that Surged Last Night Begin Falling in Evening Trading

**Crypto & Stock Market Wrap: Bitcoin Tests Resistance, Stocks Retreat After AI Surge** Bitcoin consolidates around $66,000, facing key resistance near $68,000—an area seen as a major psychological and technical hurdle where previous rallies have failed. Analysts note the cryptocurrency is caught between its 200-week moving average (~$63,333) and 200-week EMA (~$68,328). A clear break above $68k is needed to signal a stronger bullish trend, while a rejection could lead to a retest of $63k support. Market sentiment remains cautious, with low futures open interest pointing to a low-liquidity rebound rather than a full bull market. Bitcoin spot ETFs saw another $203 million inflow. US stock futures pointed lower after a strong Tuesday session led by a massive rebound in semiconductors and memory stocks. The rally was fueled by renewed optimism about AI-driven hardware demand, with Micron, SanDisk, and SK Hynix surging. However, those gains reversed in pre-market trading. Super Micro Computer (SMCI) soared over 20% after hours on strong guidance and a record backlog. Other standouts included Rocket Lab and nuclear energy plays Oklo and X-Energy. Rising oil prices (Brent above $91) and climbing Treasury yields (10-year near 4.64%), however, are reigniting inflation concerns and acting as a headwind for equities. In Asia, markets were mixed. South Korea's KOSPI pared early gains to close slightly higher as semiconductor stocks like SK Hynix gave back initial surges. Japan's Nikkei edged lower as the yen hit a fresh 38-year low against the dollar, raising fears of potential market intervention. Key events to watch include the Samsung Galaxy launch, AMD's AI event, and a slew of major tech earnings from Alphabet, Tesla, and IBM after the close on Wednesday, followed by the ECB meeting and Intel's earnings on Thursday.

marsbit2h ago

BIT Trading Moment: BTC Still Suppressed by Weekly 200 EMA, Rejection May Restart Decline; Storage and Semiconductors that Surged Last Night Begin Falling in Evening Trading

marsbit2h ago

Former CFTC Chairman, Circle President Tarbert: Preaching Long-Termism While Cashing Out $30 Million Himself

Former CFTC Chairman and Circle President Heath Tarbert has consistently advocated for a long-term vision in public, urging patience from investors as Circle’s stock price has fallen significantly from its peak. However, it has been revealed that since Circle’s IPO, Tarbert has continuously sold his CRCL shares through pre-arranged trading plans, cashing out approximately $30 million, without making any public market purchases. This contrast between his public messaging and personal actions has drawn criticism. Tarbert joined Circle in July 2023 as Chief Legal Officer, leveraging his regulatory experience to help guide the company through its IPO and expansion. Despite promoting stablecoins as long-term infrastructure, he established a 10b5-1 trading plan just before Circle went public, leading to substantial stock sales over the following year. In March 2026, he initiated another plan to sell more shares. His career trajectory highlights a pattern of moving between high-level regulatory roles and influential positions in the financial sector. After resigning as CFTC Chairman in early 2021, he joined Citadel Securities as Chief Legal Officer just 27 days later, during a period of intense regulatory scrutiny for the firm. He later joined Circle, aiding its efforts to navigate regulatory challenges for its public listing. While Tarbert's expertise in policy and compliance is valuable to companies like Circle, his actions—advocating long-term confidence while personally divesting—raise questions about the alignment between his public statements and his private financial decisions, leaving investors who followed his advice to bear the market risks.

marsbit2h ago

Former CFTC Chairman, Circle President Tarbert: Preaching Long-Termism While Cashing Out $30 Million Himself

marsbit2h ago

Gate Research Institute: The 'Wall Street-ization' Wave of Crypto Financial Products – Competition or Integration?

The article titled "Gate Research Institute: Are Crypto Financial Products Sparking a 'Wall Street' Wave—Competition or Convergence?" explores the evolving relationship between the crypto ecosystem and traditional finance (TradFi). The piece begins by reflecting on Bitcoin's original 2009 vision of decentralization, disintermediation, and moving away from banks. It then contrasts this with the 2024 landscape, where key crypto assets like Bitcoin are increasingly held through Wall Street products like ETFs issued by giants like BlackRock. The article questions whether this signifies that TradFi is systematically taking over the rights to issue, price, custody, and distribute crypto financial assets. The core argument is that this is not a zero-sum takeover but rather a bidirectional convergence where each side addresses the other's weaknesses. Crypto offers 24/7 global markets, programmable settlement, and open access but lacks compliant channels, institutional-grade custody, deep fiat liquidity, and mainstream distribution. TradFi possesses these but is constrained by legacy systems, limited operating hours, and slow settlement. Two primary convergence paths are highlighted: * **Path A (CEX to TradFi):** Exemplified by Gate, which has progressed from offering tokenized stocks and CFDs to providing direct, real stock trading (US, Hong Kong, South Korea) within its platform, using USDT. * **Path B (TradFi to Crypto):** Exemplified by Robinhood, which has integrated crypto trading, acquired exchanges like Bitstamp, and is moving traditional assets like stocks onto the blockchain via tokenization and its own Layer 2. Both paths are ultimately competing to become the next-generation, unified financial account—a "super account" where users can seamlessly trade cryptocurrencies, stocks, ETFs, RWA (Real World Assets), and tokenized treasury products in one interface. The growth of RWA and tokenized treasuries (e.g., BlackRock's BUIDL) is presented as the asset-layer fusion, providing stable, yield-bearing assets on-chain and acting as a bridge between the two worlds. In conclusion, the "Wall Street-ization" of crypto is framed as a mutual transformation. Decentralized ideals persist in the protocol layer, while at the application layer, a more efficient, global, and accessible unified capital market is emerging from this convergence. The future competition lies not between crypto exchanges and stockbrokers, but between platforms vying to offer the most comprehensive asset coverage, liquidity, and user experience within a single account.

marsbit2h ago

Gate Research Institute: The 'Wall Street-ization' Wave of Crypto Financial Products – Competition or Integration?

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

How to Buy ZEN

Welcome to HTX.com! We've made purchasing Horizen (ZEN) simple and convenient. Follow our step-by-step guide to embark on your crypto journey.Step 1: Create Your HTX AccountUse your email or phone number to sign up for a free account on HTX. Experience a hassle-free registration journey and unlock all features.Get My AccountStep 2: Go to Buy Crypto and Choose Your Payment MethodCredit/Debit Card: Use your Visa or Mastercard to buy Horizen (ZEN) instantly.Balance: Use funds from your HTX account balance to trade seamlessly.Third Parties: We've added popular payment methods such as Google Pay and Apple Pay to enhance convenience.P2P: Trade directly with other users on HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): We offer tailor-made services and competitive exchange rates for traders.Step 3: Store Your Horizen (ZEN)After purchasing your Horizen (ZEN), store it in your HTX account. Alternatively, you can send it elsewhere via blockchain transfer or use it to trade other cryptocurrencies.Step 4: Trade Horizen (ZEN)Easily trade Horizen (ZEN) on HTX's spot market. Simply access your account, select your trading pair, execute your trades, and monitor in real-time. We offer a user-friendly experience for both beginners and seasoned traders.

3.6k Total ViewsPublished 2024.03.29Updated 2026.06.02

How to Buy ZEN

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ZEN (ZEN) are presented below.

活动图片