Agree or disagree? https://twitter.com/richardchen39/status/1732366803794362547
Founders
The credentials aren’t for the entrepreneur to feel confident, they are for the investor to feel confident, no?
Founders
stated: no logos pls revealed: portfolio actually doesn’t have that many ex Harvard ex miccysoft etc. Consider me impressed
Founders
Stated vs. revealed preferences Saying that with 7 years of venture experience.
Founders
You'll get what you put out. If you don't care about MIT don't put it on, if you do then do. That way you'll match with investors who feel the same That being said this tweet is A+ bait
Founders
I actually don't quite understand why people throw around where they went to college when they're no longer fresh graduates. We are adults, what you have successfully built is a stronger argument than an MBA from an Ivy League.
Founders
Stated preference: this Revealed preference: credentials still matter a lot
Founders
Disagree - I know first hand how difficult it is to get funding without those shiny team logos to give investors confidence. Having successful exits may be just as relevant, but that's a small subset of people who try to raise - especially early stage.
Founders
Stated vs. Revealed presences. Someone saying “I graduated from Harvard and did YC” will always garner extra consciously or subconsciously That said, if a deck is just logos, but the business proposition makes no sense, logos won’t help that much
Founders
Last 5 years // last 2 credentials, whichever is fewer Before 5 years or more than 2 is not useful I skipped other credentials on our pitch deck, though unlike what the tweet says, I didn’t go with 0. Raising for a crypto company in a bear market and not saying I built for 4 years at CB would be kinda foolish
Founders
A credential conveys a lot of information that is much harder to obtain without it. They're not everything, of course, and they could be misleading.
Founders
It’s true because I deff dgaf and I’m the CEO of HODL 🤷♂️😂 💎🙌
Sign of immaturity. Top-tier investors don’t care.
Founders
When vcs stop saying they’re impressed by my logos, I’ll stop including them
Founders
Depends on what you’re doing and if a prior affiliation is has given you a specific insight or ability
Founders
Disagree. Decks aren’t immune to social proofing, whether or not people are aware of their bias.
Founders
It’s true(ish). The best pitch decks have wild enough growth that nothing else in it matters to justify an investment. Those are exceedingly rare (most investors never see one).
Founders
Positive signal if the background aligns with the pitch eg the key ingredient of the startup is underwriting risks well and the team has done it at Square etc. Never heard good investors turn down pitches just bc logos on the team slide. I bet he won’t too.
Founders
Hard agree. The right folks with the right stuff let their worl speak for itself. And investors and partners who need the social proof in order to back you are too easily impressed and influenced.
Founders
totally disagree. if vcs didn't care about those logos then founders wouldn't put it on there. don't hate the player, hate the game
Founders