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

marsbitОпубликовано 2026-06-09Обновлено 2026-06-09

Введение

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.

Связанные с этим вопросы

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.

Похожее

As the US and Japan Hike Interest Rates, Which Asset Class is Most at Risk?

This week, global markets face two major events: the Bank of Japan's likely interest rate hike and the US Federal Reserve's FOMC meeting. For risk assets, it is a pivotal and volatile week. In the US, expectations for rate cuts have faded dramatically. May's higher-than-expected CPI and resilient jobs data have shifted the Fed's focus from potential cuts to the possibility of future hikes. New Fed Chair Wash is unlikely to raise rates at this meeting, but any hawkish shift in communication, the dot plot, or the policy statement could lead markets to price in tighter policy, pushing up short-term Treasury yields and strengthening the dollar. High-valuation growth stocks, AI-related assets, and small-cap stocks reliant on cheap funding are most vulnerable to rising rates. In Japan, a 25 basis point hike is almost fully priced in (98.3% probability), which would bring the policy rate to 1%, its highest since 1995. The concern is not the hike itself, but its potential to unwind the massive "carry trade," where investors borrowed low-yielding yen to invest globally. Historically, Japan's rate hikes have coincided with global market stress (2000, 2007, 2024). While this well-telegraphed hike may be digested smoothly, two key factors increase uncertainty: 1) Governor Ueda's absence due to illness, putting communication in the hands of less-familiar deputies, and 2) the Fed meeting occurring just days later, creating potential for a compounded market reaction if both central banks sound hawkish. Asset implications: * **Bonds:** US short-term yields sensitive to Fed signals. Japan's rate hike could pressure its massive US Treasury holdings. * **Currencies:** Dollar likely supported by Fed; Yen's reaction hinges on BoJ's forward guidance. * **Equities:** US growth stocks, small-caps most at risk. Japanese stocks face pressure from a stronger yen. * **Crypto:** Assets like Bitcoin face headwinds from higher rates and tighter liquidity; high-beta altcoins are even more vulnerable. The convergence of these two central bank meetings amplifies market volatility risks, with potential spillovers across asset classes globally.

marsbit5 мин. назад

As the US and Japan Hike Interest Rates, Which Asset Class is Most at Risk?

marsbit5 мин. назад

Data Decrypts the BTC Cycle: Three Major Bottom Signals Illuminate Simultaneously, Q4 Could Be a Crucial Turning Point Window?

"Decoding the Bitcoin Cycle: Three Bottom Signals Flash Simultaneously, Is Q4 the Key Turning Point?" The article analyzes Bitcoin's current market position, comparing it to historical cycles. BTC has corrected over 52% from its October 2025 peak of $126,198 to around $59,100 in June 2026. While significant, this drawdown is milder than the 77-86% declines seen in past bear markets. The analysis is framed within Bitcoin's four-year halving cycle. Past cycles show a pattern: prices peak 12-18 months post-halving, bottom 12-14 months after the peak, with lows typically occurring roughly 17 months before the next halving. Following the April 2024 halving and the October 2025 peak, this pattern suggests a potential bottoming window around Q4 2026, ahead of the expected 2028 halving. Three key on-chain metrics are signaling undervaluation: The MVRV Z-Score has dropped near 0.27, approaching historic bottom zones. The market price is only about 9% above the network's average realized price of ~$53,600, a rare low premium. Bitcoin's price recently touched its 200-week moving average (~$62,200), a level that aligned with bottoms in 2015, 2018, and 2020. While US spot Bitcoin ETFs saw record outflows in May/June 2026, indicating retail panic, whale addresses (holding 100+ BTC) reached a yearly high. Entities like MicroStrategy resumed buying, and long-term holders control a near-record 78% of the supply, suggesting accumulation. A major macro overhang was partially removed with a US-Iran ceasefire agreement in mid-June 2026, which eased oil prices and triggered a sharp BTC rally. However, persistent inflation means high-interest rates remain a constraint. The conclusion notes that genuine investment opportunities often arise when confidence is lowest, amidst narratives that "this time is different." While not guaranteeing an immediate bottom, the confluence of cycle timing, undervaluation signals, and shifting macro risks suggests late 2026 may be a critical period for reassessing risk/reward and patient accumulation for long-term believers.

marsbit5 мин. назад

Data Decrypts the BTC Cycle: Three Major Bottom Signals Illuminate Simultaneously, Q4 Could Be a Crucial Turning Point Window?

marsbit5 мин. назад

The Shutdown of Claude Mythos Revealed the True Cost of Renting AI to Me

The sudden shutdown of Claude Mythos this week starkly highlights a critical, often overlooked risk for founders: when your core capability relies entirely on someone else's platform, your fate is not in your own hands. The key question becomes: who truly owns the intelligence your product depends on? For years, the debate around open-source models focused on cost. Now, the evidence is clear: fine-tuned open-source models can achieve frontier-level quality for specific, mission-critical tasks at a fraction of the cost. However, the deeper issue is control. Relying on a third-party API is like renting; it works until the landlord changes the rules, raises the rent, or asks you to leave—as Mythos experienced. The lesson is not to stop using frontier models—they are incredible infrastructure. The goal is ownership. Ownership means starting with a powerful open-source model and shaping it around what makes your company unique: your data, workflows, domain expertise, and definition of "good." Over time, the model becomes less generic and more reflective of your business, creating durable value. The optimistic conclusion is that AI's future doesn't hinge on one superior model. There is no single frontier. The frontier includes proprietary models, models fine-tuned on company-specific knowledge, specialized models for narrow problems, and intelligent routers orchestrating model ensembles. The most interesting development is not models getting smarter, but intelligence becoming increasingly customizable. The winning companies will be those that transform intelligence into a unique, owned asset. Looking ahead, the vision is not one model dominating all, but many teams owning the part of the frontier that matters most to them.

marsbit52 мин. назад

The Shutdown of Claude Mythos Revealed the True Cost of Renting AI to Me

marsbit52 мин. назад

Tiger Research: U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve - Should the Market Be Happy or Disappointed?

Tiger Research analyzes the evolution of U.S. legislative efforts regarding a strategic Bitcoin reserve, concluding the market impact is limited in the short term but potentially positive long-term. The core event was a March 2025 executive order by former President Trump, which designated confiscated Bitcoin as a strategic reserve and promised not to sell existing holdings (approx. 190k BTC). As it contained no mandate to purchase new Bitcoin, the market reacted negatively, with prices dropping 5.7%. Legislative history shows a significant retreat from initial ambitions. The 2024 "BITCOIN Act" proposed mandatory purchases of 1 million BTC over five years. Reintroduced in 2025, it stalled due to high fiscal costs, concerns over dollar hegemony, and opposition from the Treasury Secretary. The current frontrunner, the 2026 "American Retirement and Monetary Advancement (ARMA) Act," is a compromise. It lacks any purchase requirement, instead focusing on consolidating existing government-held Bitcoin and legally prohibiting its sale for at least 20 years. While ARMA has higher passage odds due to bipartisan support and no purchase mandate, its immediate market effect is neutral. It eliminates potential government selling pressure but creates no new demand. The long-term significance is that formally establishing Bitcoin as a national reserve asset in law could later reignite debates on mandatory purchases. Therefore, the path to a government buyer is longer than initially priced by the market, but the directional narrative remains intact.

marsbit55 мин. назад

Tiger Research: U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve - Should the Market Be Happy or Disappointed?

marsbit55 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы

Популярные статьи

Как купить ZEN

Добро пожаловать на HTX.com! Мы сделали приобретение Horizen (ZEN) простым и удобным. Следуйте нашему пошаговому руководству и отправляйтесь в свое крипто-путешествие.Шаг 1: Создайте аккаунт на HTXИспользуйте свой адрес электронной почты или номер телефона, чтобы зарегистрироваться и бесплатно создать аккаунт на HTX. Пройдите удобную регистрацию и откройте для себя весь функционал.Создать аккаунтШаг 2: Перейдите в Купить криптовалюту и выберите свой способ оплатыКредитная/Дебетовая Карта: Используйте свою карту Visa или Mastercard для мгновенной покупки Horizen (ZEN).Баланс: Используйте средства с баланса вашего аккаунта HTX для простой торговли.Третьи Лица: Мы добавили популярные способы оплаты, такие как Google Pay и Apple Pay, для повышения удобства.P2P: Торгуйте напрямую с другими пользователями на HTX.Внебиржевая Торговля (OTC): Мы предлагаем индивидуальные услуги и конкурентоспособные обменные курсы для трейдеров.Шаг 3: Хранение Horizen (ZEN)После приобретения вами Horizen (ZEN) храните их в своем аккаунте на HTX. В качестве альтернативы вы можете отправить их куда-либо с помощью перевода в блокчейне или использовать для торговли с другими криптовалютами.Шаг 4: Торговля Horizen (ZEN)С легкостью торгуйте Horizen (ZEN) на спотовом рынке HTX. Просто зайдите в свой аккаунт, выберите торговую пару, совершайте сделки и следите за ними в режиме реального времени. Мы предлагаем удобный интерфейс как для начинающих, так и для опытных трейдеров.

563 просмотров всегоОпубликовано 2024.04.02Обновлено 2026.06.02

Как купить ZEN

Обсуждения

Добро пожаловать в Сообщество HTX. Здесь вы сможете быть в курсе последних новостей о развитии платформы и получить доступ к профессиональной аналитической информации о рынке. Мнения пользователей о цене на ZEN (ZEN) представлены ниже.

活动图片