Mat Sherman | MatCap

[Music] Hey everybody, welcome to another episode of Fun Raising, a podcast where we talk to early stage investors to get all the tips and tricks tidbits that you need as a first time fundraising founder in closing your round. Today I have a super special guest, another fellow Matt, not only Matt, but Matt with one T, we have to represent that one T is best we can, but we were just talking before this, we've known each other for almost a decade now as we've journeyed through both the founder game and the now a little bit in the VC game, but I also know that you have a slightly different way than a lot of the other folks on this podcast have as far as investing. Could you start with a quick introduction about yourself and then maybe dive into how Matt Cap works? Absolutely, well thank you so much for having me stoked to be on with another fellow Matt with one T, it's incredible. So my name's Matt, you know I'm born and raised in Phoenix, Arizona, I've been here my whole life and kind of gotten to tech about a decade ago and I'll keep kind of the origin story pretty tight we can go into it more later, but through my journey of trying to break into tech from Phoenix I found it nearly impossible to raise money and it took me from the day one that I decided I wanted to be a founder, took me four years and two companies to get my first check that eventually came from Jason Callicanis, which was wonderful, you know, through that that kind of kicked off my tech career, but four years grinding without you know getting a single check, you know, with not for a lack of effort, gave me a lot of empathy for a first time founder, first time fundraiser journey. So a lot has happened since since that company, but it kind of has led me to what I'm doing now on the other side of the table, which is Matt, Matt, tap essentially is what I call adventure advisory firm, we do have LPs, we technically invest, which I'll explain how that works in a second, but we have a fundamental belief that the early stage investing world is like deeply inefficient, and that's where the alpha comes from, but I feel like there's so many great founders, but unless those founders have a warm intro, we're getting to one of the five accelerators that matter, their odds of raising money are just so so so low and the front door is so small. Matt cap is a firm that works with a large quantity of founders hundreds right now, eventually thousands, maybe tens of thousands, where we do one thing and that thing is access transfer. We make introductions to investors in our network for our companies. The way we get involved is we get a little bit of equity, we invest at part value, so we're not cutting 10k checks or even one K checks, we're cutting 100k checks, 50k checks, 250k checks, not free to use that capital, but to get involved on a founding level to be with you, along your side as you're kicking off your fundraise, and we make a bunch of introduction. We hop on calls to talk to your process, and we help you get that capital in as fast as humanly possible that may have taken you years otherwise. So that's the whole model. We're not investing large chunks of money. I don't consider myself a standard VC. I consider myself more even accelerator, but a much larger scale than other models, and hoping to just in general make the venture model a little more or a lot more efficient at the earliest stages. You hinted at something here where the ecosystem needs people like you and funds like you, because otherwise, I think the VC model, especially for early, early stage founders, is so exceedingly difficult. I think I saw the staff the other day that 0.05% of founders aspiring to raise capital, actually raise capital. That number is crazy to me. 0.0.5% will even raise capital. Let alone actually become a startup that raises follow on capital that can actually make it all the way through, which is like another 1%. So the odds are not in the favor of all of these companies. So I think having a model like yours is so important for founders because they need that little bit of extra help and guidance. And I know one of the things that from your website that we've talked about, the network that you're building and then sharing and extending to these founders is also something that is truly valuable to them. So before we go into the fundraising process itself, let's dive a little bit more into your background. You had to operate your experience kind of coming into this. Why did you choose specifically to go into VC? Was it like you said, you found the gap, you wanted to help these founders, any other pieces in there of YVC. There's other ways of maybe doing that, YVC specifically. Yeah. So post to the company that Jason back, that was called Publ-Oft. I'm the company that didn't work out due to a co-founder conflict, unfortunately. Just no comment, by the way, most common reason. Yes, yes it is. And I have definitely lived it. And that's why right now I do have partners in that cap, but I have structured it differently than I did at Publ-Oft. So I found through Publ-Oft how efficient this market was and excuse me, inefficient this market is. And I wanted to solve it. So after the company didn't work out, I spent a quick spin at a YC company in Phoenix called Brenda, they do micro schools. And then COVID hit and then COVID hit all, if you, if anyone remembers who was in tech six years ago, all venture capital went online and the in person didn't didn't exist anymore for a period of time. So I saw an opening to to solve this problem out here from Phoenix. So I quit my job at Brenda. I started this company called SeatsCamp, which was a C-Corp, which which matters. I'll explain why in a moment. But essentially for four years, I worked on various marketplace products to help solve this gap. So it's not actually dissimilar from what I'm doing now. But the key is that it was a C-Corp and it was a startup and I was trying to generate revenue. And if you can put two and two together, where is that revenue come from? Am I charging founders to raise? Am I charging investors? Do I charge sponsors or brands? I did all of those things and we found some level of success that kept us going for four months, excuse me, four years. But at the end of the day, it was hard to sustain. We helped a lot of people raise money. We created a lot of value and we captured very little of it. And it's okay to not capture that much value. You create that's good for the world. But we didn't capture enough for me to sustain. And at the time, I was having kids and, you know, I just needed more stability. But the work was important to me. The work was important. You know, I knew the gap was still there. And it's still there today in March 12th, you know, 2026. So I shut that company down. You know, to get investors are right off, which is like, could be something that's actually something I didn't think about when it comes to companies. But there's like, shutting your company down isn't always a bad thing. In fact, doing it once it's done, not prolonging it is actually, you know, you know, good for your investors. But I shut it down. You got a job at Prototun for about a year. And essentially couldn't stop thinking about this problem, which is why I launched Matt Cap. As a non LLC, excuse me, non-Sea Corp, we have a little bit of a unique model. It's a fun structure. If we technically wanted to invest in companies, we could. But I believe that the values earlier in the stack and creating this like organizing function at a massive, massive, massive scale that we haven't really seen before. So that's why I care, you know, I have cared for six years. I fail at a company in this way. It's already, but I liked the grind and like the pain and chewing glass so much that I'm out again, trying to solve the problem. But this time, it's a little bit different because I am a VC. You know, technically I do with LPs. I'm not trying to get revenue. I don't charge founders, cash to work with them. So it's like a much different model and seats out. Yeah, I love that. And again, it's especially in communities or areas like Arizona that you're out of the Bay area, Colorado, where I'm from similar aspects where it still feels a little bit out of the ecosystem. So there's even more of a reason for the in person and having those strong connections. All right. So some of the next questions here are actually ones that were submitted from listeners for the podcast itself. These were common questions that they wanted VCs to ask or it's already answer. The first was what is your favorite part about being a VC and then what is your least favorite part about being a VC? I think my favorite part about being a VC is this is a, this is a recent C bias because it's just happened like yesterday, but there's a founder that I've known for about five years and he's been grinding and he's, you know, more or less kind of been struggling to figure things out. Total gem, very technical, deeply, deeply ambitious and smart. Just like, hasn't quite figured it out. And just yesterday, you know, I knew he was tinkering out of concept. I'm going to leave the, I'm not going to share the concept because I don't think you would want me to. But he's been tinkering on this like hardware product for for about six months and he sent me the website yesterday and I'm like, holy smokes like you have it here. So I actually took, took that website sent it to about maybe maybe 15 VCs and so far and this is like an actual number because I'm tracking it 10 have replied nine, one of me one as a conflict, but I'm like this guy that's been grinding, you know, hasn't quite been figuring it out. Gets this brilliant idea. I get excited about it. I send it out. VCs are interested. It doesn't mean it's going to be a fun day enough chorus, but it's just like, no, it's just a vibe shift. And I love that because I know he's been, it's been a struggle. And I know it's been a grind, but he's still out there making it happen. And I will always be able to support people that are out there making it happen that I that are in that are in the network that are that are my friends are in my portfolio. So that's my favorite thing. I love that story. Right. I'm at my least favorite thing. Yeah, it's just like, it is hard to humanize inbound. What I mean by that is I get inbound all the time from founders with various impressive interesting metrics. And if I don't know the human or don't have a way to get to know that person beyond the numbers, I don't quite know what to do with it. And I think that's tough because that was me for years, sending out emails or revenue, all the stuff, their model, our new co-founder, our investor, and just ignore the nor the nor the nor the nor the nor the and I do my best like we all do our best to respond to these or to manage these. But I could do better and I think we all could do better. And I think this is a big problem in the industry. It's really no one's problem to, you know, a VC isn't, their job is not to solve that problem. Their job is to make their LPs rich and invest in the best companies and get the best returns. So no one is highly incentivized to solve that. And I think that's tough. And I think that's my least favorite part about being the VC. Yeah, it's tough. When we get so many, we talk about this, you know, VCs are an inch deep in a mile wide, but that also means in relationships. We almost have to be an inch deep in a mile wide as well, which is tough. What's something that you wish founders maybe better understood? Maybe it's exactly what you just said. Is there anything else that you wish founders best understood about what it is to be a VC to maybe shed some light on some of the things they may not be aware of? We just kind of talked about one, but any other ones. Yeah, I mean, there's a lot I could say to be honest. I mean, I think that VCs can't really invest in what they think is the best investment opportunity. I think the VCs play a delicate game of it. They need to consistently be able to raise from LPs like future funds and oftentimes it takes a company of several years longer than a fund cycle to mature. And the VC has to make sure they're able to raise the next fund. So they may invest in more legible companies. That's the word of the day. Then then then then take more risk just so they they're able to make a case for the next fund. But that ironically may not lead or probably won't lead to better returns, but they may not get there if they don't have a second or third fund to raise. This is our model. And I thought and understand VC very deeply. I've studied it, received scout. That's like four years of just in it. And I've set up Matt Cap to be perfectly aligned to just like be like the perfect solution for the stage that we serve. And like to try to eliminate most of these problems for us, but in general, you know, VCs play a game too. And founders honestly have to play a game as well. It's not just your revenues up into the right to get funding. I mean, that can happen. But like honestly, that probably is like four if there's a bit on the list of what a VC looks for when they want to back a company. And especially early stage, especially early stage. That's just not talked about. There's actually a book that I'm writing, which is not close to being published. Maybe it's a year away or something. But it's more or less written. It goes into a lot of this stuff. And it's just like no one tells the founders like this stuff because no, who's incentivized to everyone trying to raise the next fund. So it's just like tough game, you know, to tough game. That really is what are some of the areas or industries that you are personally most excited about today if you have any? Yeah, so one is the talent coming out of Arizona State. I mean, it's deeply, like this is really not a lot of adventure here. Like this really not. And as we're not unique, you know, like like most of the country doesn't have a lot of adventure. And of course, we have a couple of firms. But I think that you know, Arizona State has produced so many great companies. You look at fountain, you look at mixed panel, you look at super memory. Like people don't know these companies started at Arizona State, but they did. They just moved to the bay. So I feel like I'm very bullish on that. This is my office is about, I don't know, a quarter mile away from Arizona State. So the students can just walk on down and hang out. Beyond that, I'm like interested in world class, you know, on the same lines, world class research institutions and other inferior, is that the right word? Just like inferior and interior city is like inferior to SF because everyone is inferior. But like people arc cities are, but people don't have to be, right? Like going to these like, you know, or I like the idea of going to the water loos or you know, specific technical schools and like finding the top five founders out of that school because I bet you there gems, and I bet you they've no access to the bay. And it's just like total opportunity to crush and this is the total plan of someone's listening to this. So like, that's a great idea. I'm gonna do it. It's like great to do it because we need people to care about more than just the same people, right? And then I think lastly, I just like, I love people that are tinkering and have not necessarily seen a failure yet, but it just like been in the grind. It's tough for me when I meet someone that hasn't quite seen a fall yet or like been through the grind. Yeah. 'Cause they mean never, they mean just be that kind of person. But it's just like, you get some sort of empathy and understanding for the game and then what not, by going through a hard time. And also going through a hard time, lots of people churn out of the industry then, and that's fine, but staying in it, tells me something and makes me wanna, you know, help you more. So those are some, you know, kind of like maybe indirect answers, but those are some themes and things that I look at, like that are just things that I'm like on my radar right now. Yeah, what's awesome is that where most people when I ask that question go to like sector specific, you went to people specific, which I think says a lot about you and what you're looking for here because at this stage, the people almost matter more than the industry or sector that they are, they're investing in. Yeah, sector agnostic. I'm like building CAA for founders. Like I, I'm an agent for founders. I don't care really like what the idea is, it could change. Of course, you know, I'm not, let's not lie. Like I'm not, I, the idea is part of the package when someone, when I meet someone, you know, it's not like it doesn't matter in that sense, but once I'm already working with a founder, like they pivot great, let's go. You know, like I, you know, it's, I'm on a very people way to person. I wouldn't be good at what I did if I cared too much about the other stuff. Yeah, love that. All right, let's go into the fundraising process, which as the title says, fundraising, it is not actually very fun at all, but we're going to split it up into three particular parts. The first is, if I'm listening to this as a first time fundraising founder, I maybe don't have a Rolodex. I don't know anybody to send my pitch deck to you or to talk to. So we'll talk about how they actually go from no relationships to actually getting their pitch decks into or in front of VCs. That's the first step. Second, we're going to go into, how do you crush the initial meeting? How do you make a good impression so that you can continue to have these conversations with them? The third step, after you've had all these initial conversations, what is the process actually look like to push a deal over the finish line? And I think the reason I'm so excited to talk to you, mentioned this before the call, where you've seen so many founders go through this gauntlet that you can speak maybe from your own experience of doing it, but also the experience of seeing dozens or hundreds of founders go through it. So this is going to be good. Little more rapid fires we go through these. Let's go start with the first phase here, getting in the room, founders like to build out what I call like their CRM, their list of people that they want to start reaching out to. What advice would you give founders in what characteristics or things they should index on when making that list of initial VCs that they should reach out to? 'Cause right now I see these lists, and it's like, "Entryson Horowitz, Sequoia, benchmark." Like is there first people that they're reaching out to, which isn't wrong, but there's a better way I think to make a list of VCs. Yeah, sure, I think that nothing wrong with building a list, but the reality you just kind of pointed out is that some of the best investors for their staves, they maybe haven't heard of. In fact, they probably haven't heard of, 'cause they don't have as big as a platform and whatnot. Unless they're deeply on Twitter, which I would suggest being on Twitter to a point, like there's like so many of these great GPs are just invisible to these founders. And that's not the GPs fault. The founders gotta go where the signal is and we will talk about Twitter, I'm sure. But to answer your question quickly is I wouldn't make a list of investors, I would make a list of friends that you've made that are connected and that's them who they know. 'Cause you might have your ideal people who you wanna talk to, but unless you have a strong intro to them, it doesn't matter. So your list should be, great, you out one buddy who went through YC, great, hey, Johnny, would you be open to making it in shows for me? Yes, okay, who do you know? Oh, I know Susan, Greg, Bob, whatever. Great, that's not your list, right? That is what I would say, like, you know, or the opposite, build out your list, you know, you should try to get like, you know, not famous people, but like people that may be better fits and then find people that know them who's going direct, can work and it works for me that's how I got Jason, but it is much better to go through what I call a node and which is someone that knows people. Yeah, I love that. So instead of building a list, it's like, figure out who you know, the list is like, is the people that you can get warm introductions through, almost through that, which is, I think it's a great approach. When you're seeing, you mentioned earlier, you get hundreds maybe of pitch decks a year, maybe even per month. Pitch decks are great because it allows us, at least in some cases, to get a really good idea of what it is that somebody is building. What is maybe the best slide or stat or thing that you want founders to make sure they put into, their pitch deck, if it's not a pitch deck, it could be a memo or an email, but what's the thing that you personally grab onto when you get those cold outreach pieces from founders? Well, before I look at a pitch deck, I need to feel compelled to open a pitch deck. So I feel like the most important thing for me is like the one liner. And it's really just like a graph of all available ideas, how on the fringe is this? Can't be too on the fringe, but can't be too mainstream. It used to be on, I guess the run for me, but he needs to be on the fringe, right? Can't be obscure, but can't be invoked. So if I, but in this, is always changing, by the way, but if I think the things in, you know, on the fringe, look at the deck, and I'm just looking for like some sort of clear story. It's so easy to make you get decked these days with AI tools, especially with Gamma. But it doesn't need to be beautifully designed, just needs to be a coherent story. Another thing too is that a lot of companies you've seen that's everyone sees it. It's just the same thing as everyone else. There's like so many of the same type of companies. So if you have some sort of original thinking in your deck, it's not one slide, but it's just like think for yourself, like build something, not because someone else did it because you actually see the problem. And with most BCs may not like this, but for me, I can take more risk. I'm not actually investing capital, investing very little amounts of capital. So I can work with thousands of companies. So for me, I prefer clarity of thought over, like a well structured deck for something that's already proven, like proven that you're thinking clear and I'll take you more seriously. Doesn't make sense. I'm gonna take a meeting, right? But like, you will get my attention. - Yeah. - Yeah, it's why the, a lot of pitch decks are lost just without complicated. They can, they can be, especially if the idea itself is complicated. What are some of the, like, is there a slide that you think founders, you just spend maybe more time on when they're creating some of these pitch decks and they send out? - Problem solution. It's like, what is the fundamental problem? And what's the solution? 'Cause that's almost like an expanded blurb. The problem, do I believe this is a problem? Okay, like, okay, if I believe it's a problem, is it a problem that I think a lot of people agree that it's a problem? Okay, if it's a lot of people agree that it's a problem, then it's less interesting. It's a problem that I, I don't think a lot of people are thinking about, but I believe it's a problem. Then that's good. If it's a problem, I don't think it's a problem, but they think it's a problem. Then that's not bad. And in fact, that could be great for them. But then the solution, I need to somehow be convinced that it's enough of a problem to like, the blurb more. And then the solution is like, great, if I think you have a good problem side, like do you have an interesting solution? Is it unique? And then it's like, not like you're gonna give me the whole thing on the solution. But you have to reel me in. And a pitch deck is, every side is not equal. Someone that gets to slide 10 is already more invested than someone on slide two. You earn conviction, like every slide is a chance to earn trust or lose trust or earn conviction or lose conviction. So someone got to slide 10 and it's thoughtful about it. Like, you aren't, that's great. But most people don't get to slide 10, or they just like scan slide, slide, slide, slide, boundaries are like, oh my god, they only spent 30 seconds on the deck, not realizing that they may as well spend zero time on the deck, you know. Yeah, that's exactly right. And I think that it goes back to your earlier point of having a clear concise method of going through it. We'll solve for that as well. Is there a mistake that you see founders make typically in this process, whether it's the outreach itself or the pitch deck or the email you mentioned, like the tagline being really important to the one liner? What are the biggest mistakes you see founders make in this phase? Yeah, super tactical. Like, don't put your valuation cap in your deck. It might change, and you might do your launching. And I don't know, don't put your value, what you're raising in your deck, don't put your valuation cap if you're raising it on a safe. And then like, don't put a bunch of advisors in your deck. Even if technically, an invite more than a advisor than an investor, like technically, I tell founders, don't put me in your deck. Like, because investors will see that, and they're like, well, if he are familiar with my model, which is for everyone right now, and if they're like, well, if he was so interested, like why didn't he just invest? And that's actually the right way to think about it. So it doesn't mean don't add advisors, it just means don't flaunt them. Don't flaunt them. And I'll say the last thing is just like, you as Gamma, I used to have the opinion recently, literally like a month ago, before I discovered Gamma, which I know is not new. I just recently found it that you should invest in a deck designer. I thought, look, you actually should invest in a good deck. I now think just do it on Gamma, do it on quad codes, you know what, you don't need to spend a dollar, spend 20 bucks a month on these tools, and that's it. So maybe the new mistake is spending time brand on a deck, especially for your pre-seed, especially for your seed. Before Gamma, before these things, maybe, but I don't think anymore. No, that was actually one of the more popular questions that I had, and you kind of nailed it was, does having a good looking pitch deck matter? That was one of the top questions. And it sounds like it is, but there's now maybe a different way of going about doing that. It's not just hiring somebody, it's using some of these tools. It's like, like I do think a really well designed pop stance out, or what, oh, really, really well designed pitch deck stance out that is done by a pro. Like I do think it can stand out. For me, though, I think the tools are getting there and are the only getting better. They're even today, I don't know if you saw, I haven't looked into it 'cause I've been busy, but Quad announced you can do like interactive diagrams within quad code or quad chat or whatever. These models are only getting better. If you can, look, if you're, you want to, I don't even know if it's like, I don't know, I wouldn't spend more than five grand. I wouldn't spend more than one grand on a deck. I think you can get good enough. And if you're not good enough to make a good in gamma, then you gotta get better at your AI skills, 'cause you're, if you're not gonna back you for another reason, right? No, that's exactly right. There's no excuse anymore. I think not to have a good looking pitch deck. By the way, this is like, I'm not a designer. This is like, this is like was actually a major point of friction for my whole tech career to be honest. Like this has always been a problem. It's a getting a good deck. So I have empathy for the question, but the tools, just the tools have changed. And it's just better for the idea guy to be honest. The idea guy was just like, better for present. We're in a time for idea people right now, for sure. I always think about how many great ideas were never funded because of how bad their pitch decks could have been. And the goal, hopefully, is that right now going forward, there's, there's less of those. So hopefully, hopefully. Any last bits of information or advice on that first phase of the fundraising process, the reaching out to investors. Yeah, I think that doing the extra thing matters. I'll talk specifically for me, going to the event, getting a face time, even if we don't talk, even if we don't engage. Just like putting in the extra effort, puts you ahead of the pack that didn't. And again, it doesn't mean that we're gonna work together tomorrow and I'm gonna make all these injuries and whatever. But I think it matters. And I think it matters to other people too. I think like these, these little things, like if someone in the backseat do an event, and you go, you going, they see that. They see the answer to me. And maybe they see you there, like, you know, do the things. And for me, people that I end up working with show up, and like, I have, like, I have a founder club and I do events and whatever. And people show up and it often works out for them. And then for some of them, if I know I'm not gonna work with them, because I just, I just know I can go into what that looks like. And I tell them, and then they either stop showing up or they keep showing up because they like the events, right? So I just think show up to the show the person that you want to work with that don't be a beggar, but show up, you know, I think it can make a difference. - Yeah, I talked to somebody the other day that said, you're the best part about, you know, the fundraising process should start months before you start fundraising. And it's just building up those touch points and networks and those types of things as well. - I'm actually gonna take 10 seconds and grab something, a stack of books that I want to show. It's like, give me 10 seconds. - Wait, yeah. So this book, this book is called fundraising. I got 50 of them. It's by Brian. - From Brian Roch, right now. - Well, he was one of my investors, yeah. - Yeah. So if you're, the last piece of advice performing me on, is buy this book. It goes into like, it goes into stack, you know, it's a building your network and whatever. And I literally have 50 of them. So if you're listening to this, like maybe I still have one by the time this publishes. Like, yeah, maybe I'll mail you one. But it's like, yeah, just like get your context up. At this stage, before you need the money, like you made the point, like before you need the money, get the book before you need the money, you know, use the tools before you need the money. Yeah, I think that's it for me. - Love it. All right, so they've, let's say that they've done a good job. They've gotten in front of the right BCs and they're about to go into that very first meeting, the initial meeting. Typically it's with, you know, partners at the fund. At various different levels. But for you, when you are meeting a founder for the first time in that initial meeting, what are some of the characteristics, traits, topics, things that you are looking for to get interested into either, in your case, you know, not just maybe moving towards an investment or partnership, but whether or not you're gonna introduce them to some of the other people on your network. - So, founders are gonna hate this, but it's vibes. It's do I vibe with the person? And why is that? Why is it vibes? I'll give, I'll give some more context here. So people aren't just like, oh, I hate this guy. It's vibes because the whole early stage fundraising, early stage meeting, pre-seed and seed, process is vibes. People invest in your company because, excuse me, people take meetings because people that they trust told them that they should meet with you. And that implies that there's maybe a walk going on here, but what it definitely implies is the vibes are good. 'Cause if someone was building something interesting, but the vibes weren't good, I wouldn't open up my network to introduce them to other people, okay? So someone vibes with me. I like them. I'd be like, great, if I like them, I know I can introduce them to someone else. I know I will throw it out. Like this is not optimal. This is not actually always optimal. There's some introverts that maybe I wouldn't buy with and I often work with these people too. But I would say the first thing I look for in the conversation is the energy, is the flowing, whatever. Second thing is is this person an expert in their, in what they are interested in? Like do they, can they talk? I think 15, 17 calls this hyper fluency. Can they talk up, down and around their concept, their idea, why they're building it, who else is building it, why they would fail, why they would succeed, why they will succeed, et cetera. Can they just like talk all around the concept, kind of just like rapid fire? It's not even a pitch. Like I don't really, I don't sit down. They don't present a deck. I have three founders coming in today into my office. I'm just like, I'm just gonna get to know them. Like I don't know what they're expecting. I haven't given them any, you know, anything to prepare. It's just a conversation, right? So I think like you have to like really know what you're doing and that comes out, it shows out if you're an academic, then like it's like that's tough because it's very easy to tell when someone's academic about it. And the last thing on this is just like they, they understand, they've some understanding of the game and if they don't have an understanding of the game, they're willing to learn it. Like that's why I got 50 of these books by Ryan. I'm gonna like hand out these books to people that like are just really raw. Great, read this, come back to me when you do. I've done this a couple of times, you know. So those are, that's kind of what I'm looking for in a meeting. Yeah, I love that. I think being able to show like your excitement, everything forward is very, very important. Is the opposite of that a red flag or what are some of the red flags that when founders come into these initial meetings that in some cases, you've already made your decision within, you know, five or 10 minutes of the call. So there is a founder I work with, deeply technical and is not charismatic at all, you know, and wasn't quite sure where to do with them when we first started talking, but they're, I mean, he's building, I'll say he's building a competitor to any video, which is when I got one that came out, I'm just like, well, you're crazy as hell. Like that's a plus. That's like a plus for you, right? Great. Not the most charismatic person, the one more shy, it's a little bit of an accent. It's not a minus. It's just not up. There's no minus. I mean, there are some minus, but it's not a minus. It's not a plus. You want to compete with a video? Okay. Cool. And deeply technical that actually has the ability to build the thing to compete with a video or start to at least. Okay. That's a plus. And at the end of the day, I just need to know that if I work with someone, I think there's a reasonable chance that a percentage of my network would also want to meet with them. And of those people, this is a percentage of people that want to write a check. And as long as I, that math works out, I'll work with someone. I don't cut my own individual large check. So I can't always think for myself, I do need to think about the people that are after me, like the VCs, but the people trust me to send good companies to them. And that's like the whole game. They trust your currency in a way. It's my, it's, it's, it's, we have a social capital bank here at Macap. And we sometimes we, someone borrow is more than than than others. But when companies do well, it always deposits more in the end of the day. And that's how we operate it. Are there any questions that you think founders should be asking in that initial meeting, whether it's with you or with the VC, not because you're going to grade them on asking it, but whether it goes both ways, founders should also take control of the fundraising process. What questions should they ask VCs in that first meeting, if there's time? Yeah, it depends. So, so, so for me, I think asking specific questions around the situation is good. I think asking, some people ask questions like, Oh, like what should I do? Or like, Hey, like what, you know, what can you make? Can you help me? Can you work, you want to work with me? Like, that's all fine. But it's like a little more junior, which is fine. Look, a lot of students do that. I think more senior is asking, doing the work and it's like, Hey, Matt, like I saw you work back by Jason, Caledon, it's like, what was that like? Or hey, Matt, like, you know, I saw that you've been the thing that's your whole life. Like why have you seen Phoenix your whole life? Just like, just the next week, you do some work and you ask questions around the work that you did, right? So, I think that I appreciate that for a firm. Yeah, I mean, if it's like an investing conversation, like how much money, you know, how many more checks do you have left in your fund? Like, how long does your decision process, if you do end up investing in me in that scenario, how long will that take? You know, if you pass, how long will that take? Well, I know, are you even interested right now? You know, asking like based on what you know about me, what are the odds that you will invest? That's a risky question because the answer is often going to be a lower number than you would prefer. So true. But those are, I think, like, those questions come off as intelligence to investors. For me, you just don't ask those, 'cause it's like a different, like, it's just like a different model, but you got to find the right questions to ask each persona, if that makes sense. Yeah. Yeah. I've seen a lot of founders multiple times where they go very deep into a fundraising process to discover that a, the fund doesn't have any capital to deploy, and you're like, well, what a waste of time or two, the check is way smaller than the amount of time you mentioned, the social capital. Sometimes VC funds will also take more time from you than the check than they are that they are giving. So getting that information released, good. No doubt. No. What is a mistake? So you mentioned maybe some red flags or things, but are there mistakes that you see founders get tripped up on in these initial meetings or interviews, whether it's the scheduling of them or in the meetings themselves? Yeah. I think founders look on Twitter and they see these people raising all this money in five seconds. They're like, I can be that that can be me. And it's always just crazy. Like the founders don't think to think about who, yeah, this was me 10 years ago. So I have empathy for why people think this way. But it's like, if someone raised $10 million dollars in a couple of weeks, like, you don't know that backstory. You don't know where that person worked before this company, you know who that person knows. You don't know who's dad that person is or mom. Like so many times I realize after the fact that like, oh, moldy, like this person's dad is blank or whatever. And that's fine. But it's just what it is. Right? Most people don't have that stuff, which is fine, but you can't emulate people that have it. So I think that's a big mistake is it's having expectations like you'll raise all this money and the high valuation quickly from great firms. Like it could happen. Probably won't. And then, which is by the way, by the way, to have a valuation that you don't deserve in the beginning could crush your next raise. Yeah. That's like, that's a big one. Not good expectations. And then another one, which is not necessarily related to fundraising, but it's really the whole company building. It's just not the word version. I'm not doing what you say you're going to do. What I mean by that is not being not being an ethical or like a bad founder, but just like investors want to want to know that you do what you say you're going to do. Like you say this, you do this, you say this, you do this, you say this, it happens. That breeds trust. And some people, oh, we're raising this. So now we're raising this. Oh, we're doing this. This, this, this. And it just doesn't breed the confidence from the investors or trust. Yeah. I agree. I think level setting going in with some good expectations could be the key to the entire fundraising process. So I agree. Totally. Definitely. All right. Let's say that Dave, they've crushed the meeting. These are going well, they're now into the real gauntlet, which is that maybe they've had a dozen of these. They've had a lot of conversations. A lot of VCs are circling. They're trying to maintain momentum and keep all these cats in one place. It's like hurting cats the whole time. What does a typical diligence process look like from the experience you've seen with some of these other VCs like what should founders expect when a VC is like interested and they're now moving past that first meeting into the meat of the fundraising process? Yeah. I mean, there's honestly a lot to unpack here, but in short, it depends on the type of company you're building. And it depends on the stage that you're racing that if you don't have much, there's only so much to do diligence you on. But if you are, if you're racing from a non-Silicon Valley style investor, they're going to ask for things. I think oftentimes Silicon Valley investors invest more on vibes, especially on their early stages. I may not ask for anything. I think the further away you get from SF, maybe New York, the more they're going to ask you for. If you have revenue, they're going to ask for proof, especially these days. If you have L.O.I.s, they're going to ask for proof. So I think they're just going to like add either one of valid date that what you said is true. But if you're racing, you know, 500K, a million, a million and a half, you may not do much to diligence or you may do a lot or if you're racing to the four million or probably a little more due diligence, but be wary of investors that ask for just way more than you think is necessary. Because oftentimes they like never end up kind of the check. So true. Horrible behavior. It's like to somebody bad actors. It's insane. Yeah. It's tough. And in a lot of times, I think, you know, I was as a founder, I hated VCs. I hate the strong work, but you know, there's not, you don't like VCs. It's because I think you feel as though you've been pushed down and beat up a little bit. You learn now on this side of the table, how often that is not purposeful like VCs are genuinely good people. They want to help. There's just so much surface area to cover that it can be difficult and then perceived often as being like rude. So one maybe slight piece of advice for founders, don't burn bridges when you feel like you've been burned because a lot of times it's not the intense like the VCs was not trying to do it, but those bridges, if you do burn them, it's a small world out there and you might regret that someday. Fully vouch that and fully believe that. It's very true. Yep. One of the things that founders often find themselves in when they get into this phase, it's a nice problem to have, but when you have to start picking and choosing which investors to add into your cap table or keep off your cap table, how much like this VC wants to write a million dollar check, this one wants to write a million to you only have room for 500K. Like how do you navigate those conversations? But really, it's what would you recommend for founders when they're indexing on which VCs to put on their cap table? Let's say at the earliest stage is their first round of funding, what should founders be indexing on most if they're maybe surfacing or trying to get a handful of VCs on their cap table? Yeah, I think like who do you like the most to be honest? Like personally. Yeah. Personally, I think that matters more if they're going to be like a lead VC or like they're going to be on your board or something, which isn't common early stage, maybe that's seed it is. I think like who do you like? Like who do you just want to work with? And it doesn't matter if they're famous or not. In fact, I would argue that maybe shouldn't be famous. You know, I think that investors that have a good network is good, but if you're someone's a VC that has raised money from LPs that like you think has a good generally good reputation that are probably well networked. Right? Oh, yeah. I think like just work with you. You want to work with. And I think if someone, you know, says they want to invest a million, but you only have five, be like, Hey, I want to work with you, but like this doesn't work. Can we figure something out? So be honest. Don't be rude about it. Just like just like be a human. They want to be humans. They want to be. You know, always act like it. Just like we were just talking about. But if you just like tell them what you want, you know, maybe, you know, especially if you're kind of over subscribed to your options, then just get optimized with who you like and who you want to be in, you know, who you want to get rich for in 10 years and who you want to be in the board meetings and stuff. I think it's that simple of the early stages. It truly is. I think it oftentimes is just who do you back to vibe? So do you vibe with the most? And be up front, be honest. I think the one thing founders forget is that we deal with these hundreds of times over. So we're used to being rejected or pushed or, or, you know, told the truth. So just do it. And you say is going to offend, I think, a VC in most cases. It's more oftenly offended when you're the one that's ghosting or not getting back to us on time or those types of things. Yep. Then there's a, yeah, I'll leave it. I've had a portfolio company that made a mistake of like ghosting. Wasn't purposefully. They were just over thinking things and ended up really backpiring for them. So yeah, it's clear communication is what a lot of this comes down to. Yep. clear communication, speed and all those things. Any other feedback or advice on the diligence process or the back and forth, the hurting cats that you've seen founders as they navigate through it? Yeah, I mean, hold investors to their timelines, meaning after our first call, the investor says, "Oh, this is how it works." We'll talk to the I.C. We'll do one more partner call with you and if we like you, we'll do one last something and then we'll invest or we'll decide to invest or not after that. And that takes about two weeks. Great, like hold them to that. And if two weeks have passed and you haven't gone to the next step, like that's the past, you know they haven't said it, right? I mean, it may not always be, but nine out of 10 times it is, right? So hold them to their process and that will also mean expediting knows, but you'd rather have a note today than to know in two months or know a long longer than that, right? So yeah, hold them to their process, speak really clean on emails, be ideally fast to reply. I'm not great at this, I've never been great at it, but I think there it does, there's something when a VC asks you for something and you get back to them with what they ask like fairly quickly, especially in a fundraiser, you don't always have to be like this although maybe you should be, I don't know, but for investors, I think they like that. Like, hey, can you send me this four minutes later? Here you go. That is a plus. That is like not neutral. That is a plus. And doing that consistently, that's like a plus plus. It's such a little thing because it tells them who you are. Now what you say, that's like that's your behavior, right? No. Yep, that's absolutely right. And momentum and speed are so important in the fundraising process and that helps you maintain momentum too. If you're taking a day or two to get back to that VC where you could just do it right now, those things add up and that momentum matters in the end for sure. Definitely. Are there any things that like you've probably seen these, isn't a question I'd ask other folks, but I think you've seen more of this than maybe other VCs have. What are some of the curve balls that VCs are going to be throwing at these founders during this particular phase? Bad advice that they might give. Like things that founders should watch out for as it relates to what VCs are giving them during this part of the process. Well, it's all a game and that's all a test. And I, on ironically or ironically, the ultimate test is the question, are you raising? And if you are raising, and that's like you're in the middle of a process and it's going, then my answer is obviously yes. But the answer if you are just are meeting with an investor and you're not necessarily, you want the money, but you don't have a bunch of meetings set up is the right answer, like is ironically no. Like you're not raising, but you don't know that, right? Like you know, so you say yes and it tells the investor something. So that's like a little bit of a test. So stupid. I get it. I get it. And I can dive into that if you want. But yeah, I mean, like they're not raising. You should just say you're not raising. 'Cause an investor may want to invest more so the versus if you are raising you, but on the market, that's one curve ball. I think another curve ball is like, I don't know, probably asking you around, like it's not curve ball, like making sure you understand the game. I think like an investor, I mean, it may throw words out that you may not know. What do you do? Do you pretend like you know them? Do you dance around it? Or you're just like, oh, I don't know what that means. Can you tell me? I think that the lot is like very good. I read this by something from a program, one of his essays, was like, if you don't know, then if it a being a founder is like, you don't have to know everything. So if you don't know something, like tell them versus if they will know if you're lying. And that's not a curve ball. That's just, that's just like a good thing for VC to do, but don't be afraid to just like say, you don't know what a term is or, I'm gonna give you a term sheet. Oh, what's that? Maybe you should know what a term sheet is, but it's like, you know, but like, like if the investor wants to give you a term sheet and you have a question about something on it, like, you know, this is nuanced to be clear. This is like a little nuanced. Like you don't want to ask VC, you don't want to be too comfy comfy with them. Well, you're gonna go shade even stuff. But I think not, you know, being honest is always better than, you know, it's stretching the truth. And those are just few things that come to mind. Yeah, VC's will always not purposely, but you know, we'll find ways to get truth out of you. And sometimes we see it slip in a little bit and you know, that can be a red flag. If all of a sudden you go off the rails and you're saying that you're getting a term sheet from this fund that, you know, I can text after the call and verify or those types of things. So always be weary of that. Another one that just reminds me, like who else is investing, right? Like I think a good answer here is like, oh, like, I mean, it could be the truth. Like I don't know, it's all, it's all new ones. But who else is investing? Oh, we just kicked off this race last week. We've 10 calls and you're like, you're on the first call. So no one yet, and that's like a fairly, like that's an okay answer versus versus saying, like, you know, no one's invested yet. I'm like, that's it. It's two very different answers. The same thing. But like how you answer it? It's like, I was just a coach, you know, founder on this yesterday, one of my, in my portfolio, they're like, like, what do I say here? And then he told me what he said. I'm just like, no, like you, you haven't raised yet. Like, so just like own what is the reality? Talk about it in a way that doesn't make you sound like you're not a good deal. Cause no one's a good deal until the deal is done, right? I don't know where that came from, but yeah, that's like something, like a framing things. You can say the truth, but frame it in a way that's true, but also helpful to your case. Yes, that's such a good point. Cause you're right, the output is exactly the same. Or the answer is the same. Roughly, it's like, well, you don't have anybody. But you can still maintain a little bit of FOMO and momentum with the other one as well. But don't say that you do have people interested. Cause I feel like the answers that we get are, yeah, we have a few VCs circling, we're trying to keep that private. It's like, well, if you really did have VCs circling, you would not want to keep that private. Because that's something that you have as an edge. So, you know, sometimes it's true, but a lot of times maybe it's not. So then we look at that as like, okay, well, maybe you're lying. Or if you say that, you know, we have XYZ specifically in there and then we'll reach out to them. That's like what's what we'll do. So yeah, don't lie about that. I like your advice of not even stretching the truth. It's just that you don't have anybody, but that doesn't mean that, you know, we don't have momentum and that we haven't spoken anybody or anything like that. Totally. And yeah, and like if you have someone that's interested, tell the investor what it actually is. Like maybe it's like, you know, if you, if I had a call with, like, you know, let's use an example for this audience. Let's say I had a call with a speedrun partner. I'm a founder, right? And speedrun, you know, speedrun said speedrun was interested. You don't like, you know, that's cool. They're going to be interested in everyone. They don't say they're not interested, right? Until they pass. You don't tell a VC, you know, like, oh, like speedrun is like really interested. Okay, this isn't tell them anyone. You can just like say like we've had calls to speedrun, blank and blank and they went well. Like say, like it's like it's just the framing. Someone kind of book on just framing stuff. It's like the same thing. It just like, but like you say you just, it's like it's hard in a different way. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. I was going to tell it because it tells me that you're like talking to people. You're not telling me how they're going. And I could ask how they're going. And you could just say they're going well. Like it's like, you don't, you don't, don't overexpose yourself. If you don't have the nuts, if you have the, if you have like that, you know, if you have like that, the goods, if someone invested, great. They, but yeah, you know, I, so I agree with you. No doubt. No, no. I love the, I mean, there's so much, it's, it's tough. And every fundraiser is different. This is why first time founders, they have it the hard way. Your second, third, fourth time through the rodeo will be much easier because all these things will become a little bit more second, second nature in a way. Because it is a game. It's very different than the actual startup process itself, like building a company and running a company are oftentimes so different than fundraising for that said company. It's a completely different skill set. Definitely. Two different games that you must play if you want to build a venture back company. Exactly right. Let's go into what happens after the fundraise. So a lot of times you know, the game begins, you celebrate for five minutes and then it's straight back to work. But what are some of the mistakes that you've seen founders make right after they close around? Are there any like glaring things that founders should be aware of when they finally got that money in the bank? Yeah, spending it, spending it's equally. This is like a big problem for the rest time founders. I have the same problem, you know, this is not, I mean, it's very natural. You get a big, about a money in your account. You forget that it's not yours and you forget that's not even your VCs. It's like LPs right? And you just allocate, you just like get excited and you just like over allocate, you over hire. I'm trying not to do that. I think obviously your investors are giving you money to spend it or else like why would they invest? But unless your post-public market fit, you really shouldn't. Like you really should like stack that. Use what you need, but like you shouldn't plan. If someone gave you a million dollars, you shouldn't spend like that's giving you 18 months runway. I mean, that's not maybe a million a half or two million. You shouldn't like assume that it's gonna be 18 months runway. You're gonna raise in 12 months. You should spend as little as humanly possible until you find product market fit. And much easier, seven, I try fully empathize with how hard that advice is to follow, but it is the right advice in my opinion. Beyond that, it's like, oh yeah, you're gonna say something. - No, I was gonna say it's either that founders, they invest, they spend too little or too much. It's like, it's the middle part that's tough. I would say that 50% of the people that have answered this question with related to capital say that big mistake they see founders make is actually not spend the money. And then another side is that they spend it too quick. So the answer is probably somewhere in the middle. - It's definitely in the middle. And it's like, no one really has the answer but the founders, 'cause they have like the context. I think a general rule of thumb that is extremely general. And I heard it, I saw it once on Twitter, and I thought it wasn't bad. It's until you have PMF, you should like probably try to limit your burn to like, you know, 30K, you know, a month. It's like, it's so arbitrary, but I think it's like generally not a bad framework. 'Cause if you have to hide, unless you're doing deep tech and you obviously know none of this applies to you if you're doing that kind of stuff, but like 'cause you're gonna raise more than a million dollars if you're doing deep tech probably. But it's like, yeah, I don't know. I think I'm more in the camp of don't spend it. As long as you're going towards your, your, your, my, your head. going towards your milestone, which by the way, that's what you're raising for. You're not raising it for 18 months. You're raising it for a milestone that allows you to raise it again. So as long as you're executing on that milestone, with the, then I think you just don't spend it. Of course, like you should, I mean, yeah, I don't know. That's kind of how I feel. I'm not saying that's correct, but that is, you know, maybe it's PTSD from me doing the opposite with a former company, right? But that's kind of how I feel about it. What about on that, you mentioned like hiring too quickly. What are some of the mistakes or reasons you think founders hire too quickly, right? After they raise their money, they just think that's what you're supposed to do. And again, I'll say it again, like I made the same mistakes with Publoss. We got just a hundred grand. It was not a lot of money for Jason. And we thought we were going to raise more of course, but I brought in someone to help us sales. We were doing good revenue, like 20 grand a month or so. So it's like, yeah, good revenue. But I brought someone into help with sales, Jeremy brought someone into help with operations. We went to focus on fundraise and we didn't raise anything. And we realized that we had no idea how to train these people and they weren't doing anything. And I don't think our sales person brought in a single sale not to his detriment. That's my fault. And I just like, I don't know, like you raise money, you feel like you're more important than you were before you had money. And you're not. You have more of a responsibility to make it work. Like what I'm doing now with Matt Cap, it is kind of like a startup in that. We're not investing capital. Most of the capital goes to operational. So I feel the same. And when we got the checks, it differently and mentally, I'm like, great. I now have more responsibility to allocate this correctly versus when I was younger, I had a responsibility to do what I think a founder is supposed to do. And like, it's like not a good way to think about it. So yeah, I mean, founder of the sales, you're a founder. Should I do sales yourself or have an agent do it? You should be running it. You know, only hire when you need it to, when it's painful with if you're not hiring. And these days figure out how to like, if you're not doing agent stuff, like do agent stuff, like maybe you don't need a hire ever. I don't know. I don't have anyone. I may never have someone. I'm really deep on the agent stuff and doing a lot of stuff for me. So it's a different world these days. Definitely leverage AI to help speed your progress without having to hire anybody. There's so much, especially for operational sales, marketing, those types of roles. So I completely agree with that. What are some of the things that you should, you would give like founders expectations on for how helpful VCs on their cap table are going to be after the fundraise? Like what should the expectations be for founders as it relates to their relationship with those VCs? Yeah, but I would not expect your VCs to be value-ed. And it's not a dick on VCs at all. You should expect your V, like I think the best case scenario, it will be the best case scenario that has most common is the VCs does no harm. They don't hurt the company, they don't help the company. That's fine, that's fine. If they're on your board, that's not the best. But we're not really talking about boards, like the earliest stages. So I think ideally you want to, if you see it just like doesn't even, they respond to your update, it's a great job. And that's kind of it. I would say 20% of investors maybe more, if you're like kind of an outsider, it's like not in the mecca. Maybe it's more than 20%. But many do damage to the company without realizing it. And you may not even realize it either. And then I would say there's only like, I would say like 5% of investors actively create a lot of value for companies, especially pre-product market fit. If your post-product market fit is a little easier to provide value, but pre-product market fit, there's like a various spawn number of investors that can help. And that is okay. Like you know, like I don't think that people will disagree by my core of like a Founders Fund benchmark. I guess benchmarks is kind of different. But I'm like a Founders Fund guy where like you know, a VC, a Founders should not expect a VC to provide value. If you need help, you can ask a VC. They should be able to help. But they shouldn't be, how to team their value add. Of course, of course, there's different schools of thought on here obviously. By generally, I'm in that camp. - Yeah, I think that's true. At least the expectations of being, you know, don't expect your VC to be so heavily involved. Some of them will. There's a lot of good VCs out there that will. But to expect them or rely on them too is a mistake for sure. - Yeah, it's a reflection on you. Like that's kind of weak. Like the VC works for you. The VC would, I guess it's more, the framing that's more like the VC would work for you. That's why they backed you. If you start leaning on them for too much, it's like, I mean, you're kind of loose trust with the VC. Like if it comes to a follow on conversation or something, it's the downstream investors, different. But like I think the best founders I help and the data stopper rate. And they ask me for a favor here and there. And I do it. And but they don't lean on me. Some founders do lean on me until they get funding. And then they don't, which makes a lot of sense. That's what I'm here for. But like you really should lean on your team and on yourself, not your investors. You know, of course, if you're backed by Andreessen, then you'll be the things that you can do. And Andreessen's great, obviously. I don't know. - No, just the expectation setting, I think it's the right move there. Last kind of question, you've seen a lot of founders go through, not only the fundraising gauntlet, but have gone on to actually build their businesses. We talked about this earlier. Small percentage of them actually end up working out. What are some of the biggest reasons that founders, even in the early stages of their company, can keep an eye out for that are going to end up being the reasons why the company won't make it at all. - Selling too much of the company to early, just a bad cat table, who really is what I'm saying. Too many advisors, investors that have too much equity that just will blow things up. If they lower their equity, having a bad board member, there's like that stuff. Yeah, I think another one is like, some things are really just like bad, bad-ding luck. Like if you built a company that was around software developers like three years ago, and you weren't prepared for the AI stuff, and then the ground just shifted beneath your feet, and you might be able to figure it out, but your job is now harder than it was before, and before it was still incredibly hard. I think raising it to your evaluation, then you get like a pre-seed, and this is, all this is new ones, I keep saying that, but it's true. I think of the pre-seed, it's hard to screw this up. As long as you're raising between like a, I don't know, a max of, I'm not gonna throw out a number. As long as you're raising a reasonable amount based on your circumstances, which should not be over 15 or 20, and ideally should be much less to be honest. Like you're not gonna have a two-hour evaluation, but I think taking money at a hoot, like having soft-baiting come in and investing in your company at a $3 billion valuation, when you really should be getting a $400 million valuation, so where they kill your company? Those are, I mean, there's a million ways to die. And then all, just like bad luck, you have a competitor who's just stronger than you, better funded, you just aren't able to get the capital together. You like, does a million reasons, especially in the age of AI. And that's not a reflection on you. Sometimes it is, sometimes you make mistakes and you kill your own company, and that is just how it is. I'll own that with PubLoft, but sometimes the things are just to add a your control, and that is fine, 'cause that is what the game is meant for that, and you should not look down on yourself in the mirror. You should, you know, shut down, get your shareholders there, write off or whatever, pick yourself back up, and probably get a job for a little bit, and then if you want, get back in the arena and try again, 'cause it's not designed for it to be 100% hit rate. It's not this, but as a founder, you think you're the one that's gonna win as you should. So it's very types, it's very types psychologically, if it's not working out, and I felt this, you know, two times deeply, and many more times, a little more lightly. Yeah, but you're right, you build up that, that callus over time, and that's why you see all these founders when they launch something, it's usually like, or you have a success, it's usually like the fifth or sixth startup that they've built. So I'll definitely keep that into consideration. Matt, this was amazing. This was an hour-packed episode, full of information for founders in that process, where can folks learn more about you, find you online, and keep up. Yeah, definitely thanks for having me. I think to find me, I just launched a brand new website yesterday, so March 11th. So check it out, it's mattapp.vc. I did a blog code at it, nice animations and stuff. And yeah, find me on Twitter, Matt, I'm just source German. I'm gonna be posting a lot more. I've been kind of quiet as I've been building stuff the last few weeks, but I'm gonna be out there more. This is probably like maybe the start of me being out there, as I'm starting to talk more about Matt Kep. And yeah, email is mattamattsherman.com, email me anytime. I love it. Matt, thanks again for representing the single tees out there. Next time on Miner's Zone, though, I'll reach out. We'll try to maybe do something out there. Yeah, please do. We ought to have like a mat squared or something, or like a mat mat, have a bunch of mats around, it'd be like a mat times 10 or something. We got an analogy, but definitely come out, you know, that will definitely get something going. Thanks for having me on the podcast. - Oh, thanks, Matt. Have a good one. - You too, bye. ♪ Bitch, bitch, pass ♪ ♪ It a rated flash ♪ ♪ Story beats data when the story lines last ♪ ♪ Vision's the ignition, but the number's still the right ♪ ♪ Conviction and precision, watch investors collide ♪