Between the pre-seed and seed rounds for Griffin we pitched nearly 200 different investors. These are some of their reasons for saying no.
- It's too early[1]
- *sound of investor ghosting*
- Brexit
- The market is too small
- The market is huge, but only if you expand to the US, which we don't think you can do
- The market is huge and has experienced massive growth but we feel there is no more growth to be had
- The market has long-term commodity pricing dynamics so there is no profit to be made here
- Your customers are too small and not enough of them will grow beyond that
- You won't get a bank license
- Your team doesn't have enough people with banking experience
- We think the product is too simple
- We think you will not be able to build a product
- It will take you too long to build a product
- We see strategic value here, we just want to wait until we can engage commercially [from a strategic investor]
- We see strategic value here and we think this would be a good investment, but we're only investing in AI and blockchain companies right now [from a strategic investor]
- You're not raising enough capital now - you need way more
- You're raising too much capital now - you should try to do a smaller version of what you're doing
- You will have to raise a lot of capital in the future and we're not sure you will be able to
- You will have to raise a lot of capital in the future and that will dilute our ownership stake
- We're not comfortable investing unless you as founders invest £[more money than we have]
- It has taken you too long to raise this money
- What are you talking to us for? You should raise with an ICO!
- We're too small of a fund for this
- We're too big of a fund for this
- [vague excuse to cover for the fact that they are in between funds]
- [honest statement that they are in between funds]
- We only invest after revenue/product-market fit (from a seed fund)
- You don't know how to sell this
- We like to see an "explosive" sales pipeline
- We don't invest [in the UK / in the EU / outside of the US]
- We don't invest in firms that aren't EIS eligible out of preference
- We don't invest in firms that aren't EIS eligible out of legal requirement
- You have too many competitors
- The biggest firms in your space aren't doing this, therefore it's not worth doing
- These businesses aren't fundable
- Your competitors are too well-funded
- We don't understand what differentiates you from your competitors
- Your competitors are executing badly now but they will start to execute better in the future
- [summary of efficient markets hypothesis][2]
- "The solution is somewhat derivative"
- You don't have a competitive moat
- We have a competitive investment in [competitor]
- We have a competitive investment in [not a competitor]
- We don't have the expertise to evaluate you
- This is out of scope for us [from a fintech fund]
- We don't have conviction about what the future of this space is
Honorable mentions: unreasonable conditions
- We'll only consider investing if you can bring a second institutional investor to the table
- We'll only invest if [a major strategic firm] takes a stake
- [once we actually had a term sheet] We'll invest if you let us invest on the terms of your last round
- [once we actually had a term sheet] We'll invest a very small check if you give us a 40% discount and a board seat
And a recommendation for aspirational VCs reading this:
[1]: This catch-all excuse could mean anything from "we don't invest at seed" to "we're busy watching Game of Thrones"
[2]: This was from a partner at a £500M VC fund