Pinned Tweet
Today we announce @InspiredCap Fund IV. $450m more to back rational optimists shaping the intelligence age. The next decade will be unlike anything we've ever seen. Buckle up!
Today, our team is excited to announce @InspiredCap Fund IV, $450M in new capital to back early-stage founders.
There has never been a moment in history when more is possible. It takes just one person with exceptional ambition to take on the world’s problems and change billions .
37
2
203
9,589
A quick break from Reindustrialization, inference, and capital cycles to show what being 4 but also 74 years old looks like
1
0
19
711
trilliondollar.pdf
The benefits of abundant intelligence will accrue far outside of San Fransisco.
Spent the last year writing about capital, sovereignty, and the coming reordering of economic power.
THE COMMANDING HEIGHTS
Commanding-Heights.com
0
0
10
1,621
I’m not sure if you’ve heard, but you are only an AI native company if you are built in the Bay Area
Otherwise, you just have sparkling technology driven operating leverage
Otherwise, you just have sparkling technology driven operating leverage
4
0
32
6,411
OG ad tech 🤝 creator commerce
Excited to see former 14 year TTD vet and CCO/CRO Jed Dederick join @InspiredCap company ShopMy
(ShopMy is honestly too cool of a company to have/require an active X account)
Excited to see former 14 year TTD vet and CCO/CRO Jed Dederick join @InspiredCap company ShopMy
(ShopMy is honestly too cool of a company to have/require an active X account)
0
2
7
935
1) Law firms really are bad businesses as evidenced by how quickly this can happen
2) If you zoom out, it’s sort of the same thing that happened in hedge funds over past decade. Talent moves to pods because they can make more and keep more with shared infra set up
Late stages of a capital cycle = winner take all environment
AI probably serving as a secondary catalyst here in a deeper way than appreciated. If you’re an AmLaw X Partner with a $20m book of business, and you keep ~50% because the other half goes to support staff of juniors, and then a competitor tells you that you can keep 75% - 90%…
2) If you zoom out, it’s sort of the same thing that happened in hedge funds over past decade. Talent moves to pods because they can make more and keep more with shared infra set up
Late stages of a capital cycle = winner take all environment
AI probably serving as a secondary catalyst here in a deeper way than appreciated. If you’re an AmLaw X Partner with a $20m book of business, and you keep ~50% because the other half goes to support staff of juniors, and then a competitor tells you that you can keep 75% - 90%…
NEW: Brian Resnick from Davis Polk restructuring team now on scene at Weil and wind-down now being actively discussed among options:
ft.com/content/69ccfc…
0
5
96
27,938
What many do not know is that cold brew to pour over season transitions at the same time as negroni to old fashioned season. It’s never the same day, or even the same month, it’s just a feel
And it has begun
And it has begun
0
0
5
902
Chris Brown retweeted
america is falling behind because its professional class has embraced managerialism as the ultimate aspiration.
224
588
7,599
497,362
~100 responses in 24 hrs. Very happy to see the interest, as it’s more important than ever that talent flows to the right places.
Alongside a few friends, we’re going to formalize this with an experiment called the Off Cycle Fellowship.
Join the crew: offcyclefellowship.com
Alongside a few friends, we’re going to formalize this with an experiment called the Off Cycle Fellowship.
Join the crew: offcyclefellowship.com
1
1
60
10,819
Important topic, but I find the continuous chatter on X about it to mostly be myopic
It doesn’t make someone more founder friendly to skip inquiry into competitive differentiation. One could actually argue the opposite. More typically, it reflects the fact that an investor is allocating capital from (1) a fund that is so small that by the time competitive differentiation manifests in a good or bad way they are far from the day-to-day call or (2) a fund so big that they have the ability to king make something that is working should the market become competitively concerning
Btw, if anyone is actually drilling you on moats, this is the format of the best response I’ve ever received (paraphrasing from notes):
“In a traditional sense, at scale, this business naturally benefits from [insert one of the trad moats: switching costs, network effects, cost advantages, etc.] That is a natural consequence of [insert the way pricing strategy, product usage, or market dynamics lead to the chosen option.]
But at this stage we tend to think more about the accumulating advantages that get us there. The first is team. [Insert why team is world class in some way and hard to replicate.] The second is what we call our competitive basecamp — the first milestone we’ve achieved that makes us hard to catch and starts the flywheel. That happened last month in the form of [describe]. Over the next 24 months, we will [insert milestone 2, then milestone 3.]
If we execute on all of that, we become pretty hard to catch — and the [reference trad moat chosen at onset of response] starts to become visible.
It doesn’t make someone more founder friendly to skip inquiry into competitive differentiation. One could actually argue the opposite. More typically, it reflects the fact that an investor is allocating capital from (1) a fund that is so small that by the time competitive differentiation manifests in a good or bad way they are far from the day-to-day call or (2) a fund so big that they have the ability to king make something that is working should the market become competitively concerning
Btw, if anyone is actually drilling you on moats, this is the format of the best response I’ve ever received (paraphrasing from notes):
“In a traditional sense, at scale, this business naturally benefits from [insert one of the trad moats: switching costs, network effects, cost advantages, etc.] That is a natural consequence of [insert the way pricing strategy, product usage, or market dynamics lead to the chosen option.]
But at this stage we tend to think more about the accumulating advantages that get us there. The first is team. [Insert why team is world class in some way and hard to replicate.] The second is what we call our competitive basecamp — the first milestone we’ve achieved that makes us hard to catch and starts the flywheel. That happened last month in the form of [describe]. Over the next 24 months, we will [insert milestone 2, then milestone 3.]
If we execute on all of that, we become pretty hard to catch — and the [reference trad moat chosen at onset of response] starts to become visible.
Lots of VCs kindof sound like this: "Your basketball team doesn't have a moat, any healthy human can throw the ball into the basket thingy. "
People who have not run companies before don't understand how much the team matters more than some imagined structural moat.
0
0
15
2,194
I love this idea from @mp_lew. I will do the same. Show me an offer letter for banking / PE / consulting and I will help you find an equivalently compelling conversation with a startup (likely NYC, SF, or Austin)
chris at inspiredcapital dot com
chris at inspiredcapital dot com
Show me an EB/BB/PE Summer ‘27 offer letter, and I will introduce you to meaningful and exciting startups (in your geo & industry of choice) who will still scratch the must-address prestige/logo itch.
Seriously… I’ve been in your shoes. DM’s open.
1
3
116
15,467
I prefer to say "east coast hair, west coast flair" but alas thanks to @Cookie for the coverage of our newest fund
10
2
51
2,455
The best business models in the world are often the oldest ones. Congrats @danpres and @standinsurance on all the progress.
Today @standinsurance announced $70M at a $1B valuation, led by @Saga_Ventures. A year ago, we insured $1B of property. Today it's $10B. Disasters follow the laws of physics. Insurance should too. Here's what our team is building:
1
2
12
1,047
There’s this concept called “puck’s eyes” which refers to
(1) puck’s angle differs from shooter perception, often higher EV
(2) it is within shooter control to change puck angle (notice Kaprizov drag to center mass)
Pretty good analogy for everything when you think about it
(1) puck’s angle differs from shooter perception, often higher EV
(2) it is within shooter control to change puck angle (notice Kaprizov drag to center mass)
Pretty good analogy for everything when you think about it
This angle is perfection
0
0
49
16,234