Fundraising

New VC fund managers do not know that these things they are doing are completely ILLEGAL… ❌ There are very strict rules around fundraising. Yet many new GPs copy what they see others doing — even when it’s illegal. The risk? Trouble today, or 5–10 years down the line when regulators or LPs look closer. Sophisticated LPs know the legal lines — and crossing them exposes both liability and inexperience. Here are the 3 most common fundraising violations (and how to avoid them): 1️⃣ PERFORMANCE-BASED FUNDRAISING COMPENSATION 👩🏾⚖️ Many “Vendors” often say: - “I’ll be a venture partner — give me carry for LPs I bring.” - “We’ll raise for you — just pay a % of capital committed.” 🚫 Illegal without a broker-dealer license ($50K–$150K+ + ongoing compliance). Even employee bonuses tied to fundraising can trigger violations. ✅ Legal way: Pay fixed fees or salaries unrelated to fundraising. Compensate with cash, equity or carry — but not tied to capital raised. 👉 Reality check: As a new manager, it’s extremely unlikely that anyone else can fundraise for you without a track record. You’ll almost always need to do the hard work yourself. 2️⃣ GENERAL SOLICITATION 👨🏻⚖️ New managers assume LPs will roll in if they “go public.” Tactics include: • LinkedIn posts about fundraising • Cold DMs to people • Podcasts/webinars about your fund • “Contact us to invest” buttons on websites 🚫 All illegal — unless you’ve structured under narrow exemptions. Even cold outreach counts as solicitation. ✅ Legal way: You can only pitch people you have pre-existing relationships with who are accredited investors. Network authentically, vuild relationships, then pitch one-on-one. 👉 Reality check: Public fundraising isn’t just illegal — it looks cheap. LPs won’t trust someone blasting cold posts with no track record. VC is trust-based. Public asks scream inexperience. 3️⃣ RAISING FROM EU LPS WITHOUT COMPLIANCE 🧑🏿⚖️ Many assume: • “If a European LP wants in, I can accept the money.” • “Everyone else does it — must be fine.” 🚫 Wrong. The EU regulates under AIFMD (Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive) and MiFID II (Markets in Financial Instruments Directive). Even one EU LP can trigger filings. Regulators act quickly. ✅ Legal way: Work with EU securities counsel. File required notifications in each jurisdiction before accepting European LPs. 👉 Reality check: European LPs expect compliance. Skip it, and you lose credibility. Worse — a violation can come back years later and jeopardize your fund. Breaking the rules — even by accident — is the fastest way to undermine your credibility. And “everyone else does it” is not a defense. The managers who win are the ones who know the rules, build real relationships, and raise the right way. ⚖️ Know the rules. Follow them. Your fund' future depends on it.

This Danish foundation gives away $1.3 billion annually – and their secret isn't efficiency ratios, it's something far more radical: They implement nothing. Behind this Danish foundation's rapid rise is Ozempic – the blockbuster diabetes and weight-loss drug that's generated unprecedented profits for Novo Nordisk. The Novo Nordisk Foundation, which owns about a quarter of the pharmaceutical giant, has become one of the world's wealthiest charitable foundations with assets around $167 billion. Yet rather than hiring armies of staff like other major philanthropies, they've gone the opposite direction. In a recent interview, their Chief Scientific Officer for Health Flemming Konradsen revealed their secret to me: They don't implement – they only work through partners. Zero programs. Zero direct service delivery. The model: ➡️ Find what already works  ➡️ Partner with governments who own the strategy ➡️ Create sustainable markets, not dependency  ➡️ Stay for 15+ years, not 3-year cycles Example: Their school feeding programs create permanent markets for local farmers while training health workers and scaling AI solutions across continents. The hard part? Saying no to putting your name on things. Letting partners get the credit. Trusting that influence matters more than control. For development professionals: This approach creates new opportunities. These ultra-efficient funders skip the usual suspects and source partners who can be trusted with strategy, not just execution. They're looking for implementers who think like owners. If you can demonstrate government relationships, long-term thinking, and the ability to build sustainable systems (not just deliver projects), you become invaluable to this new breed of funders. What could your organization accomplish if it stopped trying to do everything itself? Disclaimer: I’ve edited this post as it’s been flagged that Novo Nordisk Foundation has 250 employees. #Philanthropy #Partnership #Foundation 📷 Novo Nordisk Foundation

Y Combinator is widely regarded as the most successful startup accelerator in the world and the top choice for world-class entrepreneurs. They've helped incubate more than 90 unicorns, 45% of their companies go on to raise a Series A (higher than the 33% average), and the combined market cap of their startups is currently over $600B. To honor the final day you can apply to Y Combinator’s first-ever Spring batch (i.e. X25), I teamed up with past collaborator Palle Broe on the most in-depth and intriguing analysis you’ll find anywhere of the world’s most successful startup incubator. Palle spent over 100 hours (!!!) digging through all available public data to pull back the magic that is YC—so that others can learn from their success. Key takeaways 1. YC has gone from being a Consumer investor to primarily a B2B investor. Consumer companies have resulted in over $200 billion of market cap, while B2B companies are currently privately valued at some $170 billion and are on the rise. 2. Based on batch profiles, founders are betting on AI (specifically, B2B AI) to be the next big thing. The most promising subcategories include “Engineering, Product, and Design,” Infrastructure, and Sales. 3. Solo founders are at a disadvantage. Although solo founders are encouraged, the data does show a steep decline in the number of them accepted to YC. 4. Success has so far been driven by U.S.-founded companies. More than 70% of the startups have been founded in the U.S., and to date, 99% of returns have come from the U.S. 5. The durability of YC companies is significantly higher than that of the average startup. More than 50% of companies are still alive after 10 years (vs. 30% average). 6. The chances of startup success are higher with YC. 45% secure Series A (vs. 33% average), 4% to 5% become a unicorn (vs. 2.5% average), and 10% achieve an exit. 7. The VC power law also exists at YC. Four companies account for more than 85% of YC’s returns to date: Airbnb, Coinbase, Reddit, and Instacart. 8. The investors in YC companies are the “crème de la crème.” Tier 1 VCs frequently invest in YC companies, and some have made several hundreds of investments. Here's the full post: https://lnkd.in/gR8mr5XT

Founders: planning to fundraise every 18-24 months is planning to fail these days. The 18-24 months tagline has been standard VC wisdom in the US for many years. And our data from 2018 through 2021 shows that it was actually good advice! But things have radically shifted over the past 2 years. The median time between primary round fundraises so far in 2024 is 2.18 years (or ~26 months). Lines on the chart below show the median time between primary round fundraises by quarter. We included Seed to Series A (in black), Series A to Series B (in blue), and Series B to Series C (in orange). The green dots indicate the median for the year. From 2018 through 2021, the data lined up pretty neatly with the standard advice zone. In fact, time between rounds actually drifted down a little, starting at 1.72 years and ending 2021 around 1.62 years. Of course then we hit the major fundraising downturn, interest rates changed, the VC world flipped - and timelines extended rapidly. 𝗡𝗲𝘄 𝗔𝗱𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 • Expect the money you raise today will need to last you for 2.5 years at minimum.    • The biggest factor in company spending has traditionally been payroll - and we've seen founders cut back sharply on new hiring in response to this new reality. Be specific about your team size.    • Yes, there are bridge rounds happening and they are not shown in the chart below. But you don't want to rely on the possibility of bridges or extensions when building your fundraising plans.    • Certain sectors (like AI) are raising at a higher frequency, but even the hottest industries are well above the old medians for time between rounds. AI companies need to be default alive as well. Does this mean that many more startups should aim for profitability off the bat? Perhaps. Becoming a free-cash flow generating business is an amazing feat - but focusing too much on that early on can leave potential investors cold on your growth prospects. Tricky balancing act. The data is clear: getting new dollars in the door is taking longer than it has in 7 years. Adjust accordingly! #startups #fundraising #founders #venturecapital #runway Fresh startup data hand-delivered to your inbox—subscribe at the link in graphic below.

How to Analyse a Company (Like a Real Financial Analyst) Most people look at the stock price. Analysts look beneath it. Because the secret to smart investing isn’t predicting it’s understanding. Here’s how professionals break down a company: [1]. Understand the Business Before the balance sheet, comes clarity. What does the company actually do? Where does its money come from? Is it cyclical, defensive, or growth-oriented? Does it have an edge: brand, patents, or market share? If you don’t understand how it makes money, you can’t value what it’s worth. [2]. Analyse the Financials Numbers tell a story, if you know how to read them. Income Statement: Revenue growth (YoY) → Is it expanding or stagnating? Gross & Net Margins → Are profits growing with sales? EPS trend → Consistency builds trust. Balance Sheet: Current Ratio = Liquidity Debt-to-Equity < 0.35 → Stability ROE > 15% → Efficiency Cash Flow Statement: OCF > Net Income → Real cash, not accounting profits. Interest Coverage > 2.5 → Comfort with debt. Free Cash Flow = OCF – CapEx Healthy cash flow means survival. Healthy margins mean growth. [3]. Evaluate Valuation Now the question — is it worth it? P/E → Are you overpaying for growth? PEG → Growth-adjusted pricing (lower is better) EV/EBITDA → Compare across peers DCF → Find intrinsic value Because price is what you pay. Value is what you get. [4]. Assess Management & Risk A company is only as strong as its leadership. Transparent governance → Trust Consistent strategy → Vision Red flags → Sudden accounting shifts, share dilution, or rising debt. Good management compounds value faster than numbers do. [5]. Decide with Logic, Not Emotion Ask yourself: Is it undervalued? Is it growth, value, or dividend play? What’s my exit plan? You don’t need to be smarter than everyone just more disciplined than most. In investing, clarity is your greatest edge. The deeper you understand the business, the lesser you’ll depend on luck. ----- Jeetain Kumar, FMVA® Founder, FCP Consulting Helping students break into finance and consulting PS: If you want to start your career in finance, check the link in the comments to book a 1:1 session with me #finance #cfa #investment #interviews #consultation

Love this campaign by Stella. "Worth it" ✨ Playing off a familiar scene we all know. That claustrophobic bar. Enter "Claustrobar" You're crammed shoulder to shoulder... Getting bumped left and right. Then you get your first sip. Makes it all worth it. 👀 Or does it...? We're seeing the OPPOSITE trend for B2B events. Marketers want smaller more niche events. Think dinners with 15 to 25 people. ONLY the exact ICP they want. We just did our Q1 retro at The Alliance 🧵 NEW Q1 EVENT DATA FOR YOU: Dinners under 25 people drove 3.4 times higher average pipeline per attendee than 200+ person field events Sponsor satisfaction scores were 27 points higher for private dinners vs traditional happy hours Events with personalized pre invite cadences had a 35 percent average acceptance rate among ICP targets Renewal rates on sponsor programs anchored around curated dinners hit 82 percent, compared to 58 percent for "open bar" events Thats why we're doubling down on niche events. Dinners and intimate VIP exeperiences. Why they worked so well: Step 1: ICP first targeting Every attendee list starts with sponsor aligned ICP firmographic filters: Company size, role seniority, industry fit, existing buying intent. Step 2: Personalized outreach Dedicated in house teams send direct invites framed around relevance. We track weekly acceptance rates and optimize touchpoints if we fall below 30 percent. Step 3: Pre event intel Sponsors get attendee insights two weeks before the dinner. They know which companies and titles are coming so they can plan the content PRECISELY for that audience to make it hyper relevant. Step 4: Structured conversations No loud music. No random crowds. Strategic seating charts and guided conversation topics aligned to the topics attendees and sponsors care about. This makes the experiences great for BOTH the company sponsoring and the attendees. Ends in a win win for everyone. Example for you: At our Austin dinner for a sponsor in Jan - 17 handpicked senior leaders attended - 76 percent of attendees booked follow up demos within 21 days - The sponsor sourced $3.2 million in net new pipeline which was 3.1 times their original goal TLDR Invest in more dinners ✌️ 

People sometimes see Acumen raising large amounts of commercial capital and assume we no longer need philanthropy. No sooner had we announced $250M for our Hardest-to-Reach fund — to bring off-grid light and electricity to 70 million people across 17 of Africa’s most challenging markets — than some concluded Acumen must be set. In fact, the opposite is true. First, let me acknowledge how tough this fundraising environment is. I couldn’t be prouder of the team and partners who made our Hardest-to-Reach announcement possible after 2.5 years of relentless effort. And yet it’s worth underscoring: none of this would have been possible without philanthropy. Philanthropy is the first mover. It allows us to place early bets in fragile markets like Malawi and Benin, cover the development costs needed to structure and raise investment across the capital spectrum and provide the technical assistance that builds capacity. To put a finer point on it: of the nearly $250M raised for Hardest-to-Reach, more than $80M is philanthropic. That risk-taking anchor made it possible to prove new models — and ultimately unlock institutional investment. During Climate Week last month, I met philanthropists who see this as the time to pivot from grantmaking toward impact investing. While I understand the instinct, I want to offer a reframing: it’s not either/or. If you want your capital to have lasting impact, there may be no better use than catalytic philanthropy — especially when deployed through blended finance models like Hardest-to-Reach. Philanthropy cannot see itself at the margins. It is catalytic capital — risk-taking, patient, and unabashedly impact-first — creating the conditions for commercial capital to follow. And it's more important now than ever as traditional aid shrinks and many governments shift from grants to investment approaches. At Acumen, philanthropy from donors at all levels remains our bedrock. It enables us to reach the hardest-to-reach, build inclusive markets where none exist, and keep social impact at the center of everything we do. And because solving problems of poverty is Acumen’s mission, raising philanthropic capital will remain essential to our work.

America needs 10,000 more small developers. But $100K+ pursuit costs keep most people out. Here are the 4 ways to fund the chase: Most developers quit before their first deal closes. It has nothing to do with talent. They think the hardest part is finding good properties. It's not. It's funding the chase. Let me show you the $100K+ barrier that kills careers before they start. I was talking to a sharp developer last week. Great eye for deals. Strong construction background. He'd been "getting ready" to start developing for 18 months. "I just need to find the right property first," he said. That's backwards. Here's what actually happens: You find a property. Then you spend $100K+ before you even know if it works. The breakdown: • Surveys and title: $5K-$20K • Legal fees: $10K minimum • Environmental studies: $3K-$50K • Site planning: $10K-$100K • Permitting: $500 to millions (depending on complexity) Most developers run out of money before they run out of deals. The successful ones solve this first. Here are the 4 ways to fund pursuit costs: 1. Platform Investors: They back your operating company, not individual deals. Best option if you can get it. 2. Predevelopment Loans: 12-18% interest, personal guarantees required. Expensive but available. 3. Seller Financing: Motivated sellers sometimes help with pursuit costs. Rare but powerful. 4. Your Own Pocket: Still the most common. Also the biggest barrier to entry. The reality: America needs more small developers. But $100K+ risk capital keeps most people out. The solution isn't finding better deals. It's finding better capital. Stop looking for properties. Start looking for partners who understand pursuit costs. P.S. This is exactly what we cover in our Introduction to Real Estate Development course. From pursuit costs to closing day. Details in the comments.

Once upon a time, "stakeholder engagement" was about showing up at UNGA and Davos, and working with big, prestigious NGOs like WWF on commitments to provide reputational top cover. That is how corporations sought to control the sustainability narrative and build a social license to operate. But now, the activist landscape has fragmented, big NGOs have both declined in influence and localized, and tiny, faceless organizations have the power to bring down large corporations. There is a whole section of my book about this! Here, Charlotte Moore at Sigwatch provides the concrete data to back up these arguments: The decline of large institutional NGOs has coincided with - and in many cases, accelerated - the prominence of newer, more agile pressure actors: Digital-first Campaigns - Movements like Target Fast or Latino Freeze can go viral in days, driven by content rather than a central office. They are hard to engage in traditional dialogue because there is often no formal leadership. Shareholder Activists - Groups such as Follow This or ShareAction buy stakes in companies and use investor rights to force climate, governance, or human rights resolutions — a form of market pressure that can bypass public campaigns entirely. Influencer-led Consumer Advocacy - Individuals like Vani Hari (Food Babe) or Robby Starbuck can rally large audiences to demand brand changes, often targeting retail-facing companies with little warning. Grassroots Legal Activism - Small, specialised groups file strategic lawsuits — often in multiple jurisdictions — to set precedent or delay projects. These actors can be local in scope but global in impact. Super interesting read! https://lnkd.in/d9u4FGqm

Every founder has a slide that says, “We’ll acquire customers through content marketing, paid social or partnerships.” And in 2025, nearly every investor has learned to ignore it 😿 The old go-to-market playbooks are not working anymore. The channels are saturated, the costs are high and the returns are diminishing. From where I sit as an early stage investor, a generic GTM plan is no longer a sign of preparation - it’s a red flag. It shows a founder is ready to execute someone else’s old strategy, not discover a new unique one tailored to their own business. Founders who are successful finding their first customers and raising capital are demonstrating something else entirely - not a polished plan, but a series of insightful discoveries. Here’s what I see actually working to prove you can access a market: ✔️ A Portfolio of Scrappy Experiments. Before you can find a scalable channel, you need to prove you can find ANY channel. The most impressive founders show up with stories of things that don't scale. They acquired their first 50 users by building a free tool that solved a tiny problem for their target user or by personally engaging in a specific Subreddit or Slack community. This proves you have the creativity and grit to find customers where others aren’t even looking. ✔️ A Founder Who Is the Distribution Channel. Early on, your most powerful GTM advantage can’t be bought because it’s actually YOU. Investors are looking for a founder with a unique ability to reach the market. Are you an expert with a following in your industry? Have you built a deep, trusted network that represents your initial customer base? Show how your personal brand and unique insights give you an unfair advantage that no amount of ad spend or marketing can replicate. ✔️ Mastery of a "Micro-Funnel." Instead of a broad, leaky funnel, demonstrate that you can dominate a tiny, efficient one. Prove that you can convert a very specific persona from a very specific source with incredible efficiency. For example: "We can turn a clinical research coordinator from a specific LinkedIn group into a qualified lead for $15." This level of precision is far more impressive than a vague, top-down plan to capture a massive market. It shows you have a data-driven foundation from which to grow. The goal of an early-stage GTM isn't to prove you can scale, it's to prove you can learn. Your first GTM strategy shouldn't be a playbook - it should be a lab notebook full of weird and (hopefully) winning experiments. 🙌🏼 Shout out to Alex Iskold from 2048 Ventures for teaching me a lot about funnels over the years and what he calls 'magic moments' 🙏🏼