Thread:

A few thoughts on VC advice. VCs meet a lot of founders and see a lot of companies. Over time, we develop great mental frameworks for things that are likely to work and things that are likely to fail. We call it pattern matching. 1/

The problem with pattern matching is that there is always a great counter example to every pattern, which is why if you don't leave enough space for the possibility of the exception, you will miss on a great one. In fact, most great startups are the exception to the pattern. 2/

Most of the time going against the pattern is just stupid. Which is why the whole contrarian thing is stupid. But, sometimes going against the pattern is profound, especially when it is rooted in a unique insight. 3/

Same thing applies to founders. If you are going against the pattern, fine. But, why? Is it grounded in a unique insight, approach, or POV? Because if not, then don't do it. No reason for it to work this time if it has not worked in the past. 4/

Which brings me to the advice VCs offer to their startups. Many VCs have never actually operated or have first hand experience with most of the operating issues they advise on. And most are lucky to have been associated with one successful company. 5/

But, because we pretend to be in the business of advising on company building, we draw on our shallow or highly narrow experience (the one successful company we invested in) and share that narrow/shallow/biased wisdom with founders we work with. 6/

I share this because there is a lot of poor advice out there. Founders should be skeptical of VC advice and should always consider the breadth and depth of experiences of this particular person when considering the advice given. Most of it is BS. 7/

This is not to say founders should not listen. There is a ton of wisdom out there in your investors. But, treat it as another data point and trust that in the end founders have the most information and data to make the right decision. Trust your instincts and judgement. End/