Founders

Developer ecosystem @farcaster, co-founder @bountycaster. Previously: co-founder of Scalar Capital, product at Coinbase, co-producer @ethereumfilm

Know the incentives for the fund you’re dealing with.

A smaller fund will make most it’s money via carry. So there’s a lot more urgency to be in the trenches with you.

Whereas a massive fund makes its money on fees. A very different culture of investing.

@linda wdyt amirite?

Working on building zkTLS infra/products. A ruthless empiricist and meme connoisseur.

/opacity
/eulerlagrange

Yes, a few massive funds are good and the exception to this rule

Stay Curious // iixii // Lazer Technologies // Prev: CoinDesk, Roc Nation // based @basedevo

I wouldn’t say there is an ideal size.

Pre-seed 300k-1m checks i think 30m is good.

Seed / A: 200/300 mil

I think max 600m

—-

Once you go beyond that the incentive structure really changes.

In crypto there aren’t many companies that warrant 50m check sizes. So when you get to massive funds you run into other issues.

—-

All in all, i’m a big believer in moving up the fund ladder as you grow.

I’d rather get a $30m check from a $600m fund than a $6b fund.

what do you think the ideal size fund is in crypto today?

I call this random walk mindset. If you believe investment outcomes are a random walk then you only worry about fees. You raise to survive and cut operating costs.

Once this sets in the fund is cooked. Speaking from experience.