Logan Brown

Most founders mishandle their first board meeting. They treat it like a defensive review, instead of a moment to lead. This week’s HealthVC dives deep into The Board Meeting Blueprint - how to run your board like an operator, not a guest. Inside: • The perfect Board Pack structure investors actually read • A full meeting script and timeline you can use tomorrow • A decision log and action register that builds trust • The mindset shift that turns board meetings into leverage Board meetings are not compliance. They are your quarterly credibility check. Run them well, and investors follow your leadership, not question it. 👉 Read the full issue at HealthVC on Substack 

11

This is very true. The valuation trap is real. But I don’t think this is a YC story. It’s a market story. We’re seeing the exact same thing here in Israel. Seed rounds at 30–40M for companies with no product, no real validation, sometimes barely a prototype. Not second-time founders. First-timers. I’ve personally seen more than 20 rounds like this just last year. This isn’t about YC “pushing” companies. The system as a whole hasn’t adapted. The cost of building collapsed. The speed of iteration exploded. But pricing logic stayed anchored in 2021. When capital doesn’t recalibrate to reality, it doesn’t just create paper risk. It creates structural fragility. Good companies get boxed into impossible expectations. They are forced to grow into valuations instead of growing into product-market fit. That’s how promising businesses die early. The tragedy isn’t overvaluation. The tragedy is killing companies that could have become durable, profitable, meaningful businesses. This isn’t a YC issue. It’s a venture industry inertia issue. And the longer it takes to adjust, the more collateral damage we’ll keep seeing.

5

Early investors in Brex just saw 700x+ returns. Capital One acquired the company yesterday for $5.15 billion. Headlines focused on the "haircut" from Brex's $12.3B peak valuation in 2022. But for pre-seed investors who backed two 22-year-old Stanford dropouts in 2017, this is a monster outcome. YC invested at the pre-seed. Ribbit led the Series A soon after. The company was worth basically nothing at that point - two Brazilian founders pivoting from a VR idea three weeks into the accelerator program. This is the power law in action. The catch is that you had to believe in two 22-year-olds with no US credit history pitching corporate cards for startups. Most people wouldn't have (and I'm sure most people that they pitched didn't). That's the trade-off with early-stage investing. The upside is astronomical. But you're betting on founders before the data makes it obvious. Just like my Uber v. Anthropic post earlier this week, by the time everyone agrees something is valuable, most of the returns have already been captured.

62

12 Comments

A question I often get from LPs is how Operators Studio adds value to founders. Here are all the things I have been supporting portfolio founders with just over the last week: - Raising a follow-on as efficiently as possible, given the company recently hit a growth inflexion point: Everything from intros to deck prep to backchannels to structuring to.... - Flipping the business to Canada, raising a top-up to enable that: How to structure it? Valuation etc? - Thinking through two soft acquisition offers: Should we take it? What's the right price? How to structure it? - Dipsticks for two potential Series Bs in the Fall: What are investors looking for? What will be the key questions that need answering? Can we speak with a handful of friendlies? - Executive hiring at seed stage: Can you speak to a senior hire to convince them? How do we manage this awesome candidate who is asking for ridiculous equity without appropriate vesting? How do we structure comp given we are tight on cash? - A difficult conversation about major business headwinds: How do we survive? Or does it even make sense to survive? This is just the last week. Every second fund is trying to claim that "we are ex-operators"/ "we are founder-led capital"/ "we will help you build". At Operators Studio, I don't like to make these claims. I just show up every day, unblock founders in the trenches for years and years, and let our family of founders do the talking on our behalf.

17

5% of YC startups reach a $1B valuation. That's insane and it highlights how rare breakout success is even within elite accelerator cohorts. For founders, this underscores the importance of focus, capital efficiency, and building product–market fit. For investors, it reinforces the need for portfolio diversity and long-term support. Small, consistent advantages matter more than chasing a unicorn. Here's the math: if you invest in the top 5% of YC startups, you 100x your money. For example, if you invest $10k, it turns into $1m, each time you can buy 2-4 Ferraris While if you are on the other side it will turn into $500m-$1b, while you have roughly 1 in 300 million chances of winning the lottery Of course it's not pure luck - if you're in YC it's because you created your own luck, and you can create more to be in the top 5% (like Screenpipe) Why aren't you applying to YC?

72

27 Comments

They raised $10m, moved billions of dollars through stablecoin rails, and didn't tell anyone. Head to Spotify for an inside look at how Zach Walsh, Mohamed Afifi, and the HIFI team are enabling companies with infrastructure for programmable money

72

2 Comments

Here's a problem we see all the time in early studios: they copy-paste a VC fund's operating cadence and wonder why nothing feels right. Weekly deal flow reviews. Portfolio monitoring calls. Valuation-focused LP reports. All borrowed wholesale from a fund playbook. But a VC fund's primary activity is deal selection -- source, evaluate, check, board, wait. A studio's primary activity is venture creation -- generate, validate, recruit, build, launch. Those are fundamentally different jobs. When you run a studio like a fund, things break in specific ways: Your meetings are wrong. You're reviewing deal flow instead of venture build progress -- milestones, blockers, resource allocation. The work is building, not sourcing. Your team is wrong. Studios need builders at every level -- operators, designers, engineers. Not just investment professionals. You can't build companies with a team designed to pick them. 📉 Your metrics are wrong. Entry valuations and markups don't tell you anything useful. Cost-to-build-a-venture, time-to-market, and venture survival at 18 months -- those are the numbers that actually measure whether the studio is working. Your LP reporting is wrong. Report operational progress -- what's building, what's launching, what's been killed and why. Not just portfolio movements. Here's the lesson -- the studios that struggle most are the ones that adopted VC templates without modifying them for fundamentally different work. The portfolio companies don't exist until the studio creates them. Not a fund that happens to build things. A builder that happens to have a fund. The operating rhythm should reflect which one is primary. 🎯

10

1 Comment

Women influence 85% of consumer spending. Most of the markets built for them are still running on outdated infrastructure and data nobody bothered to collect. That's the $15T gap Capital F was built to close — and today we're sharing our $17M debut fund. Thank you Dominic-Madori Davis and TechCrunch for covering it. Raising a new venture fund is not for the faint of heart and I'm lucky enough to do it with Margaret Coblentz and the best LP's around. But it's WAY easier than being a founder and we get to back some of the best out there. #LFG

526

217 Comments

Polymarket acquired Dome (YC F25) - unified prediction market API from ex-Alchemy founders. ~4-5 mo post-Demo Day, est. $10-20M deal. We've written extensively on top YC startups now exit faster and faster. Lightning-fast strategics like Dome truncate the classic 5-7 year VC hold for 10-100x returns. Top decile founders now field offers mid-batch, squeezing LPs on time-weighted returns while acquirers (e.g., Polymarket at $9B val) consolidate infra plays cheap. Bad for patient capital, bullish for YC's "exit factory." TAEV = (Exit Value / Equity Raised) / Years YC’s model is almost secretly a Time-Adjusted Exit Value machine, and it’s not an accident. Three structural factors drive this: YC compresses T. --> The program forces speed to PMF through intense three-month cycles, weekly office hours, and cultural pressure to ship. That compression either kills you or teaches you to move faster than competitors, which directly improves TAEV by reducing the denominator. YC encourages capital-light E. --> Small initial cheques ($125k for 7% historically) plus pressure to “do more with less” means companies learn to validate ideas without burning through Series A capital. This improves E - you don’t raise $5M before finding PMF, only $500k. Capital efficiency at the start compounds through later rounds. The brand and network amplify S. --> YC’s reputation gives companies access to top customers, hires, and follow-on capital faster than non-YC peers. That doesn’t guarantee success, but it meaningfully increases the ceiling on potential exit value.

41

3 Comments