Season’s Greetings to all you OC VC “fans” out there. Thanks for reading and catch ya next year.

‘Tis the season to be jolly…and, also, to serve up some predictions for the coming year. The NVCA recently conducted a survey of it VC members about a number interrelated topics and have aggregated the results for your viewing pleasure in the presentation below. As a member of the NVCA, I participated in the survey and - somewhat to my surprise - found myself “mainstream” with my beliefs for next year. I don’t know about you, but I can’t wait to see what happens next year!!! Happy Holidays.

| View | Upload your own

I seem to have been dealing with customer service folks a lot lately.  So much so that it has caused me to reflect a bit more deeply on customers and the dynamics surrounding the customer life cycles.  Webster defines the word “customer” as follows: n 1. One who buys goods or services. 2. A person with whom one must deal.

Okay, so you understand what a customer is generically and you probably understand the nuances of who start-ups’ customers are if you’re a regular reader of my blog… but how many of you could tell me off the top of your heads who a VC’s customers?  After thinking about this matter the past couple of years, I’ve come to the singular conclusion that VCs fundamentally have two sets of mutually-dependent customers: the founders of the start-ups in which the VCs invest and the VCs investors themselves (a.k.a. limited partners).  As a GP, the challenge arises when trying to balance the interests of both as they are not always in alignment.  Given the normal time constraints of running a small fund without much in the way of resources, etc., it has caused me to focus on the one set of customers that can have the biggest impact to both sets of customers by serving them — the founders.  While only time will tell if I’m right, it seems to me that if I focus on the founders that have decided to partner with me to build their companies, we can collectively build companies that sell fabulous products (or services) to large markets in such a way so as the companies are successful in growing in value.  It then stands to reason that if I’m successful satisfying my first set of customers, I’ll be successful in satisfying my second set of customers.  As always, your feedback is encouraged and welcome.

Today was supposed to be the day that I broke my 141 day streak of no surfing. I was supposed to be in L.A. all day in meetings, but they were canceled yesterday and I found myself with a “free” day all of a sudden. I’d been following the reports on Surfline and Wetsand for a week or so and both had been predicting “epic” surf for South Orange County with wave heights in the 7-15 ft range today. In fact, so much attention had been given to the “monster swell” that was rolling in by the experts and my friends that I ultimately decided to take my son to one of my local breaks and watch from the sand rather than put my relative inexperience to the test in DOH (double-over-head) surf all by myself. Turns out, I psyched myself out for nothing. The picture below was taken at Doheny around 9am this morning and raises two points I’d like to discuss. First, I’ll address one of the age-old questions: “Does size matter?”. Finally, I’ll briefly delve into “how big is big enough?” Before you either tune out or turn on, you should remind yourself that I’m writing from a VC’s perspective in The OC and get your mind out of the gutter.

| View | Upload your own

So, does size really matter? If you’re talking about markets, then the answer is unequivocally yes. What do I mean.? I mean that the size of the market (as measured by total available revenue realistically achievable per year) a particular start-up is attempting to sell its product or service to matters a lot for several basic reasons from a VC’s perspective: 1) The targeted market’s margins for operational errata are much bigger (and, therefore, more forgiving) the larger the market is; 2) The larger the market is the more room for competition there is (which will inevitably occur in today’s age); 3) The larger the market is the more revenue any one particular company can aspire towards; and 4) The “law of large numbers”. Why does all of this matter to a VC? Simply put, most VCs are looking for very large returns on their investments (e.g. 10x+) and companies targeting “monster markets” are more apt to realize such returns (all else being equal). To quote a legendary “patriarch of private equity”, Don Valentine, “It’s better to invest in a company in a large market with great demand than to invest in a company that has to create it.”

Okay, okay, so size really does matter for targeted markets…but how big is big enough? It has been my experience that the answer to this question depends on a few primary factors: 1) the size of the VC fund from which you are seeking an investment; 2) the targeted market’s rate of change (in terms of growth / erosion); and 3) the background of the team attempting to penetrate the targeted market. Clarification, please. Sure, since you asked. Generally, the larger the fund the larger the liquidity event needs to be on a per deal basis to achieve the returns most LPs expect (e.g., 2x-3x cash-on-cash) given historical statistics. As an extreme example, and all other things being equal, it is arguably much harder to turn $500M into $1.5B than it is to turn $10M into $30M. Additionally, a “small” market that is growing like wildfire may generally be preferable to a “bigger” market that is quickly shrinking. As an entrepreneur, you should research the size of your intended market and understand not only it’s absolute size, but its underlying growth/erosion dynamics as well. Finally, the less seasoned the team is the greater the margin of error generally required.

A couple of final, parting thoughts come to mind as I stare at the picture… First, don’t generalize size — do your homework and truly understand how big the total addressable market is rather than that of the market generally available. Finally, understand that size is relative. For those of you who know Doheny, you appreciate the fact that while the waves weren’t DOH this morning, the 4′-6′ footers were much nicer than the typical 1′-3′ footers found there. I guess I should have gone surfing afterall…