VC Partner Sweet Spot: The Always-Sometimes-Never Rules for Pitching the Right Investor

For entrepreneurs setting out to raise a round of VC financing, with some diligent research, it’s reasonably straightforward to put together a list of target firms to pitch. Start with the firms of whatever city you’re in that have a history of investing in the stage and sector of your startup, then augment with additional firms outside your home geography which may have a strong particular fit with your company.

Yet once the right firms are identified, I believe that the tougher challenge is to determine which partner at these firms to approach. Most firms have anywhere from a couple to up to a dozen or more partners listed on their websites. How do you optimize your chance of success (i.e. ultimately, a term sheet) when pitching any given firm? Unfortunately, the thought process isn’t that clearcut, as there are a number of factors to consider. However, the easy rubric here is to follow an “always, sometimes, never” guide to determining the right person to pitch.

vc partner sweet spot always sometimes never rules


Always think about fit. It matters. A lot.

The first part of finding the right fit is from a domain perspective. Are you a founder of an ecommerce startup? It makes a lot more sense to pitch a VC who is on the board of numerous (non-competitive) e-commerce companies than someone who specializes in SaaS. He’s going to inherently better understand and help your business, both now and when you’re facing stumbling blocks down the road.

Fit extends to other dimensions as well, like stage (historically, does the VC make early bets or pile on in later rounds?), geographic expectations, number of their current board seats (and their capacity), etc.

Always take into account an individual VC’s reputation. A very important question is: Do you want to actually work with this VC? He or she will be sitting on your board for at least the next few years, not to mention all of the time spent collaborating between meetings. Even if a firm has a great reputation, sometimes individuals at that firm aren’t as pristine. Through some informal queries of fellow entrepreneurs, you can learn some additional data points on a VC’s reputation. Different entrepreneurs and different VCs all have differing working styles; some match, some don’t. The key is to be self-aware about what will work best for you and proactively seek it.

Always consider tenure at the firm. Even if a firm’s members are almost all titled “partner” externally (and not other gradations like Managing Director), some partners are still more equal than others. However, how long a person has been working at the firm matters too. Even if an individual is designated by title as being more senior than another, the individual with a longer tenure always yields more soft influence to get a deal done given his or her deeper relationships, organizational know-how, and established trust with colleagues.


Sometimes it’s as simple as going to the partner who is “easiest” to get to. Some partners at VC firms are just more accessible than others, taking more meetings with entrepreneurs both inside and outside their immediate networks. And if you’re easily able to get an introduction to a particular partner through a close tie in your own network, that’s often just the right approach. Don’t overthink it. Also, bloggers or those VCs active on various social networks generally tend to be more available (though this might also mean that these partners are receiving the most inbound deal flow because of their visibility and can be the most distracted because of it).

Sometimes it’s better to go to a more senior partner. As a general rule, the more senior the partner, the more power he or she has at the firm, so that specific investor is more likely to make an investment happen if they’re excited. But the fashion of VC titles changes over time, as there is a constant tug between conveying influence to the outside world for every team member while differentiating among rank.

The dirty not-so-secret is that a “partner” designation isn’t necessarily a true equity Partner in the firm’s actual businesses entities. Be careful, as these “small P” partners have less political influence internally. The flip side is that some of the very senior partners towards the tail ends of their careers are going to be less prolific in making new investments given the long term aspect of the commitment involved. Even though they have real power internally, their likelihood to push a new initiative forward is less than their more active partners.

Sometimes you should worry about “inside baseball.” There are myriad internal and personal factors that affect the outcome of an investment decision process inside a VC firm, but these are unfortunately hard to assess from the outside. These issues range from the number of deals an investor has done recently (the more in a given year, the less likely to do another) to being majorly distracted by existing portfolio companies to dealing with personal issues. These items aren’t going to be readily apparent externally and are only something other VCs would know (if they’re known at all).

When founders in our portfolio at NextView go out to raise a Series A, these are some of the things we talk about. We make it a habit of holding a deep-dive into their pitch, their approach, and their outreach list, and we try to be as hands-on and helpful as possible or as they need us to be. But given that these inside baseball items are opaque, it’s only useful to pay attention occasionally when approaching a firm for the first time.


Never ignore a prior relationship. Even if it’s a cursory existing relationship, if a founder knows one of the partners at a firm, it’s almost always the case that the best way to approach that firm is through that individual partner. If you instead approach a different partner through a mutual connection, there is a major risk it’ll appear within the firm like you’re going around your existing tie. An investment process will stop immediately if that’s what appears is going on. This rule is especially true if you’re re-approaching a firm again after they have passed on investing in the past.

Never be dismissive of junior investment professionals. Principals and associates may not have the full power to complete an investment without air-cover from a partner, but they are certainly integral members of any decision-making process. Ignoring or, worse yet, being rude or inconsiderate to a junior investor is a fast way to ensure that a deal won’t happen.

Ultimately, this is a relationship driven process, so use good judgment and the information above to make the right decision about which particular investor you approach at a given firm.

David Beisel

David Beisel is a co-founder and Partner at NextView Ventures. He has been focused on early stage Internet startups his entire career, both as an entrepreneur and venture capitalist. As an investor in the digital media space, David was most recently a Vice President at Venrock and previously a Principal at Masthead Venture Partners. Prior to becoming a venture capitalist, David co-founded Sombasa Media, an e-mail marketing company best known for its flagship product BargainDog. Sombasa was successfully acquired by where David served as Vice President of Marketing. David holds an MBA from the Stanford Graduate School of Business and an AB in Economics, magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from Duke University. He also founded and leads the Boston Innovators Group, an organization which holds quarterly entrepreneur events drawing a thousand attendees.

  • You should certainly not be rude to junior members of the team.

    But it is actually disingenuous the way many associates behave. They do outreach that is actually market research, founders think they might get investment, and then nothing comes from it.

    Ignoring almost all inbound interest not through an intro is a good way to avoid wasting time.

  • Jeff mensch

    Starting a Venture Capital Company in Austin, Texas, Asking for Ideas and Advice, Advisers, Investors, and Mentors

    I am searching for ideas and advice as well as Advisers and Investors as I will be starting a Venture Capital Company in Austin, Texas.

    I am raising $40-$80 Million Dollars to invest 1% or $400,000-$800,000 in Start-up and Seed stage Companies in all Industries.
    I am incorporating the Company offshore.

    Over the years both in Canada and the USA, I have helped Companies raise money using Venture Capital, Private Equity, Angel Investors, and other forms of Capital.

    I have met multiple Companies in Austin, Texas looking for Equity and Start-Up Capital.
    Austin, Texas is one of the top areas for Entrepreneurs and a top City for Business.

    I am raising $40-$80 MIllion Dollars to invest 1% or $400,000-$800,000 in Start-up and Seed stage Companies in all Industries.
    I am incorporating the Company offshore.

    The problem facing the VC market is the lack of VC money for the start-up and seed stage Companies who need Angel money BUT VC experience and connections.
    My Advisors, both domestic and international, Board of Director people, both independent and Principal level, allow my VC Company to have a unique competitive advantage to enter early in deals, have a partial exit on the next round of funding, and create value and investment returns over the long-term.

    The goal of the VC is to invest in 1% of the Fund in 10-20 deals per year, speed up the due diligence process, and create returns for limited investors starting in the first 12-18 months, with the ultimate goal of 10-100 times ROI’s.

    I am in the raising the VC fund stage. I am open to a co general partner or 1-2 limited investors, which can be international. As the Company will be incorporated offshore, there would be NO USA Tax issues for foreign partners or investors.

    My team is myself as of now along with potential advisers worldwide.
    I have worked at 3 Fortune 1000 Companies, Bank of America – Merrill Lynch, Countrywide, and TD Bank.
    I have an International MBA, Completion of the CMA Coursework, and a Microsoft, IT, MCP Certification.
    I have 10 years of Financial Planning & Analysis, Accounting, Operations Management Consulting, Internal Audit & Controls, Management, Bank Reconciliation, Payroll, Business Process improvements, Budgeting, Forecasting, Compliance, Financial Statements, IT, P & L, Operations, and Policies and Procedures experience for multiple small, medium, and large Million and Billion Dollar Public and Private Companies both in the USA and Canada.

    Jeff Muchnik cell 619-504-9939