Dan Bulteel

Everything I'd tell a founder the night before their first VC call

Hey all,

One of the most important and challenging experiences you’ll have as a founder is fundraising.

I pitched VCs across London and San Francisco. Some spent 15 seconds on my deck. Some took the call just to diligence a competitor. One told me to ask for more money. Oh, and I found out your pitch is probably being recorded and run through AI.

This is the high-impact version of all of those lessons to save you time, energy, and emotional damage.

Please comment anything missing from your experience?

OK, here we go...!

Mindset: you are the prize

This sounds weird, but it’s true.

You have to remember that they are getting the opportunity to invest in your company. The company that, in your mind, will become a major success.

Don’t use that energy to become belligerent or arrogant.

The point is to set the table correctly in your own head.

Use DocSend

Put your pitch deck into DocSend.

When you send it, you’ll be able to see who opened it, what they spent time on, and how long they read for.

That data is useful.

If someone spends four minutes in your deck, great.

If they spend 15 seconds, prepare to be underwhelmed.

It won’t tell you everything, but it gives you some signal.

The first call is not just for pitching

Most VCs will start the first call by explaining who they are, their investment thesis, and how they work.

Don’t just politely wait for your turn to talk.

Ask questions.

Do they invest in your market?
Do they lead or follow?
Etc.

You can learn very quickly whether the meeting is worth your energy, or where to double down in your pitch.

A lot of founders treat the first call like a performance. It’s also discovery.

Understand the game you’re playing

VC is a game of big bets.

They are looking for outliers. Companies that can return the fund. That means they care about very large markets, very large outcomes, and the potential for non-linear growth.

When you choose to raise venture, you are choosing that game too.

The game has changed

Pre-seed used to be called the ‘party round’.

It used to be enough to show some signal of demand. Some early energy. A small fire that needed gas poured on it.

That’s not really what I saw.

Now, even at pre-seed, the bar is much higher.

Revenue matters. Growth matters.

Capital is consolidating

There’s evidence that there is more venture money than ever.

But it’s concentrating into fewer bets.

So yes, capital exists. But access to it feels tighter. Which means you are often competing in smaller, more competitive pools, against companies with stronger metrics, stronger pedigrees, or stronger momentum.

Investors use heuristics

Ironically, investors use heuristics all the time to make fast decisions.

What school did you go to?
Stanford? Harvard? Carnegie Mellon?

What company did you come from?
Meta? Palantir? OpenAI?

Are you a first-time founder or a repeat founder?
Do you have a co-founder?
Is your cap table clean?

And the irony, of course, is that if you only fish in the same ponds, you’re less likely to find the true outliers. The next Jeff Bezos. The next Elon.

Founder-market fit helps if your CV doesn’t

If you don’t have the famous school or big company background, then your insight into the problem becomes the gateway.

What do you see that other people don’t see?

Why are you unusually well placed to solve this?

What access, understanding, network, or lived experience gives you an advantage that would be hard for someone else to replicate?

Be ready for the moat question

You will get quizzed on your moats.

Personally, I find this question harder than it used to be. Software can be generated by typing now.

So increasingly, when people say moat, what they really mean is some combination of unique data, distribution, speed of learning or brand.

It helps if the category is growing

It doesn’t have to be a giant category today.

A lot of investors are looking for categories of the future.

You can be small now, but aligned with something that is clearly expanding because of changes in the world - lower inference costs, changes in behaviour, better infrastructure, robotics adoption, whatever it may be.

Where you’re incorporated has consequence

If you want to raise from US VCs, it helps a lot to be located there, incorporated there, or have a history of building companies there.

There are also structural reasons for this, including tax efficiency and familiarity. Delaware C-corps are simply easier for many US funds.

There is growing interest in the Euro stack too, but usually that works best when you are already an outlier.

If you are not an outlier yet, like most, geography is a strategic choice.

Raise early and more than you need

This is one of the biggest lessons I learned.

I only ever wanted to raise as much as we needed. That felt disciplined to me.

But it’s actually an unpopular founder decision. And interestingly, VCs often told me to ask for more.

Raising earlier is also a strong tactic.

Why? Because when you’re still in vision mode, people are buying the story, the ambition, the possibility.

Later on, you’re not just pitching the future. You’re defending the past.

Not every VC is your VC

Every firm has a different thesis. Different taste. Different incentives. Different value-add.

Before you reach out, build a proper list.

Look at what they invest in.
Look at the stage.
Look at the geography.

Don’t pitch a B2C company to a B2B specialist.

Outreach should be coordinated

Once you’ve spent serious time building a thoughtful target list, think hard about how you reach out.

Warm intros are best.
Shared contacts on LinkedIn can work.
A short, well-written note that someone can easily forward is incredibly useful.

If you don’t have a warm lead, get the email or use the website form.

Then pick a window. Maybe a month. Maybe tighter.

But try to cluster your outreach.

VCs are a bit like dating

If they like you, you’ll usually know.

If they don’t, you’ll be confused.

You’ll get vague warmth. Soft maybes. “Stay in touch.” “Too early.” “Interesting, but…”

My advice: do one follow-up max.

After that, move on.

There are plenty more fish in the sea.

Use VCs for insight and intelligence too

One underrated part of fundraising is that it’s also a feedback loop.

Practice the pitch.
Notice when eyes light up.
Notice when someone leans in.

Pay attention to which anecdotes connect universally, and which ones don’t.

Sometimes VCs see patterns you don’t. They’ve seen hundreds or thousands of pitches. They might notice a competitor trend, a market framing, or a weak point in your narrative before you do.

Assume they haven’t read the deck

Even if you sent the deck in advance, assume they haven’t read it.

And even if they did open it, assume they haven’t absorbed the key points.

So be ready to tell the story cleanly and quickly.

Some meetings are really diligence for another company

This one is painful, but worth knowing.

VCs are curious by nature. They are constantly trying to build a picture of a category.

So yes, sometimes you will get a meeting because they genuinely want to invest.

And sometimes you will get a meeting because they are diligencing another company in the space.

I’ve had calls where they were hyper-engaged, deeply interested, asking all the right questions - only to see a few weeks later that they invested in something adjacent.

And then you realise: ah. I was helping them think.

Be prepared for the second act

The first pitch is really just about getting to the second and third.

Usually, you’ll meet one person from the team first. They’ll gather information, form an initial view, and present the deal to their investment committee - often on a Monday.

If the team likes what they hear, the diligence steps up quickly.

Be ready for a deeper round of questions, and keep your business model and unit economics close at hand.

They’ll want to know exactly how you’ll use the funds, how that capital gets you to Series A, and even what the Series A story will be that you start building together.

AI diligence

I can’t prove this, but I’m fairly sure it’s true.

Your call may well be recorded with tools like Granola, and your pitch deck may be run through AI to assess you against a firm’s founder and company heuristics.

So make sure your unique strengths come through clearly.

Final thought

Fundraising is hard. It can mess with your confidence.

But above all, remember this:

Focus on winning the customer.

If you do that, the metrics do the talking…

567 views

Add a comment

Replies

Best
Blake
I have a question for the “moat” point. Have you personally been asked this question? If so, what are some talking points VCs like to hear regarding software moats? Because of course, these are becoming harder to build thanks to the lower barriers to entry in the field.
Dan Bulteel

@blakeskrable Because of what we're building, an AI scheduling agent in email and text, moat and defensibility came up in every discussion and would often be the main reason a VC would skip in the end despite strong team and traction.

What if Calendly, Google, Claude etc. etc. does this, which I don't think is uncommon to hear regardless of category.

We don't have a technical moat and I think more and more that will be difficult to defend even with great team pedigree.

What we had was brand (our team is heavy marketing so we could build audience and have proof of that e.g. high traffic, online following, user growth), distribution (the way we grew the product was via a clever viral loop, 1 user = 2 non users) and data (we connect across multiple calendars, email and text, so unique behavioural insights).

I think the only technical moat argument would be how deep you go into an industry and your unique experience in it - so for example, if you spent 10 years working in construction, and knew all about their legacy processes, then built the perfect solution for that narrow use case, it's less obvious to copy.

Dontell Levesque

@blakeskrable For me, I’ve definitely been asked this. I usually focus on data advantage and execution speed as my moat.

Cerca Hedgecock

@blakeskrable From my experience, this question comes up a lot. I try to move away from the idea of a static moat and instead talk about evolving defensibility. For me, it’s about building systems that get stronger with usage, data loops, network effects and brand trust. I also emphasize how hard it would be for someone to replicate not just the product but the entire experience.

Dan Bulteel

@cerca_hedgecock Like this framing a lot.

Cerca Hedgecock

@dbul Appreciate that.

Martha S Bako

@blakeskrable Yes, I’ve been asked this multiple times. My approach is to be honest: early-stage startups rarely have a true moat yet. Instead, I focus on what I’m building toward, like network effects, unique datasets or community lock-in. I also highlight speed of execution as a temporary moat. I’ve found VCs respond well when I frame it as a journey rather than a finished advantage.

Dan Bulteel
Martha S Bako

@blakeskrable  @dbul Thank you.

Blake
@dontell_levesque this is a great point. In an ever-evolving world of data, this is definitely a true advantage if done right!
Dontell Levesque

@blakeskrable For me, the real challenge is not just having data but knowing how to apply it properly.

Jessica Flower

Is this more helpful for first time founders, or can experienced ones also get value from it?

Dan Bulteel

@jessica_flower Mainly for first time, but I think some trends that can help more experienced ones too, more the change in VC expectations (revenue > growth, do more with less).

Deangelo Hinkle

Hello Dan 👋. This is one of the most honest breakdowns of fundraising I have read. The part about mindset really stood out to me. It is easy to forget that founders also have leverage.

Henry Lindsey

@deangelo_hinkle this was super insightful. I did not realize how much VCs rely on heuristics for quick decisions. It explains why some strong ideas still struggle to get attention.

Lakeesha Weatherwax

@deangelo_hinkle  @henry_lindsey the point about some meetings being for diligence on another company hit hard. I have experienced something similar and it makes sense in hindsight

Dan Bulteel

@deangelo_hinkle Thank you for the good vibes!

Mukesh Kumar

@deangelo_hinkle The advice about raising earlier and asking for more is interesting. It goes against what many people think about being conservative with funding

Shannon Tan

VC here! This is a great post. Coming at this from the other side of the table, just thought I'd add a few things from my perspective being on this side for sometime

On doing your homework on the VC: it goes both ways. Most founders research the fund but miss the things that actually matter. When did they last close their fund? How much is left to deploy? Who are their LPs, some have mandates to invest in specific sectors. And who are you actually meeting? A newer partner hungry for their first deal is a very different conversation to a senior partner who's seen it all. Every fund has constraints that affect how and when they deploy, understanding those going in changes the conversation entirely.

On the competitor diligence point, I'd gently reframe this. When I'm speaking to multiple founders in a space, I try to use those conversations to be transparent rather than extract. Something like "I understand from other founders in this space that X is the challenge, what do you see differently?" That tends to spark a much more honest and frankly deeper discussion. And honestly, the way a VC handles this tells you a lot about their calibre and principles. If something feels off, like they're fishing for information rather than building genuine understanding, that's a filter too. You're evaluating them just as much as they're evaluating you.

On the moat and risk questions, every question a VC asks is really about derisking. Product risk. Market risk. Execution risk. One that doesn't get talked about enough is funding risk, the risk that a better funded competitor simply outbuilds you. How does a founder stack up against that? The honest answer is usually not by matching them dollar for dollar, but by being more capital efficient, moving faster, and building deeper relationships with their early users in ways that a larger, slower competitor can't replicate. Doing more with less is itself a signal of execution quality. Understanding which risks your specific VC is most sensitive to, and that varies a lot by fund and by partner, is as important as having the answers themselves.

Hope that adds something useful from the other side!

Dan Bulteel

@shanntlt This adds SO much from the other side. Thank you so much. I feel like a lot of people need to see this. Really helpful and founder-first - thanks again.

Shannon Tan

@dbul Glad it's helpful!

swati paliwal

Spot on with the DocSend rec; tracking those 15-second bounces is brutal but eye-opening. How do you tweak outreach timing now with AI diligence in play?

Dan Bulteel
@swati_paliwal Trying to be disciplined and do bursts of activity so there’s a sense of deal in the market and communicating a timeline. Double edged sword if things go slow though!
Luca Ardito

One pattern I keep seeing is that founders over-prepare the narrative and under-prepare the proof.

The most useful shift for me has been to go into the call with 3 concrete points: what problem keeps showing up, what traction proves it is real, and why now is the right moment to solve it.

Everything else tends to land better after that.

Dan Bulteel

@luca_ardito That's solid advice. Definitely feel sometimes performance can get the best of substance when I pitch.