Dave Lambert

I’ve spoken to over 2 dozen MDs at PE firms I can confidently say that the arb of figuring out how to implement Vertical AI at portfolio companies is very real right now It will fundamentally change underwriting for those who can do it predictably and unlock generational returns. Most are aware they need to act. Very few have.

454

64 Comments

This is great news for early venture investors: Angels, GPs, LPs alike. Shorter time to exit with partial QSBS benefits is an all-around win for the industry in a time where exits through IPOs are rare and M&As are heating up. 🔥🔥

12

I’ve been working on the theory of why small, shippable factories are the perfect inversion to the centralized prefab factory model. It all collapsed into one line of math (credit to Gilles Retsin): Factory Efficiency = Usage × (Throughput × Product Value ) / ( CapEx + Deployment OpEx) The idea is that the closer you can drive Usage to 100 % while keeping the denominator tiny, the faster the flywheel spins.  A shippable microfactory tackles this by primarily focusing on a high Usage factor. Because the microfactory can be packed up afterwards and reused, its CapEx gets amortized over multiple projects, effectively raising its overall Usage across the year. If one project alone doesn’t fully occupy the factory, it can simply roll over to another job to maintain high Usage. Its CapEx is often an order of magnitude lower than a centralized factory (< $1M vs. $10-50M min), so the breakeven throughput is more achievable on a small pipeline of work. The real breakthrough here is portability. There is near-zero stranded capital and almost no idle time. To flesh this theory out, I wrote 3000 words on the topic for Brad Hargreaves and Thesis Driven. The article breaks down: - why “fixed factories, shipped goods” is being inverted to shipped factories, fixed goods - what a sub‑$1 M robotic cell does to CapEx per home versus a £45 M off‑site plant - early production/cost data on a shippable microfactory from Mollie Claypool, Gilles Retsin, Sam Baker and the Automated Architecture (AUAR) team - the hybrid reality of robots tackling the heavy structural components and human crews assembling faster and cheaper - technical constraints to pull this model off and future considerations on the optimal business model (own vs. rent) Major shoutout to Gilles Retsin for helping me pull this together. https://lnkd.in/eRTnbZPa

54

2 Comments

Hot take: lot's of #LP's are growing underwhelmed with traditional venture investing. 💰 Fees are high given the level of engagement with the company operators. ❓ Access is opaque - LP's are unclear on the portco operations and outcomes. Outcomes are scattered - power law investing can certainly work, but many feel that venture capital investing is just a numbers game. There's another way. I'm biased, but I think it's better: #VentureStudios as an asset class. They blend: 🤜 🤛 Control and ownership 💡 Thematic focus 👬 Partnership with operators Studios offer a fund-like structure — but with more alignment, higher value conversion and less noise. If you're interested in understanding more about the studio model, we have resources to share. Please reach out and let's connect!

12

ASVLP 2026 | EMERGING FUND MANAGERS ROUNDTABLE Navigating the 2026 VC Cycle: Opportunities, Constraints & Competitive Edge for Emerging Fund Managers Raising and deploying capital as an emerging fund manager in 2026 is no longer about momentum. It’s about positioning, credibility, and structural advantage. LP expectations have tightened. Capital formation is slower and more selective. And differentiation is no longer declared — it’s demonstrated. At ASVLP — Africa Startup & VC Landscape Preview, this high‑signal roundtable brings together experienced investors, capital allocators, and ecosystem leaders to unpack what it truly takes to compete — and survive — as a new fund manager in the current cycle. This is not a discussion about starting funds. It is a candid examination of how capital is actually being allocated, where emerging managers face real constraints, and what separates those who scale institutional credibility from those who stall. Speakers Emmie van Halder — @/MPower Netherlands Varun Turlapati — Chaanakya Capital Abiola Adediran, MBA, FCA, FIMC, CMC, M.CIoD — GENEA FAMILY OFFICE Emmanuel Adegboye — Madica Mope Abudu — AfriGloCal VC Zachariah George — Launch Africa Ventures Amb. Dr. Dunston P. — Private Office of H.H. Sheikh Ahmed Bin Faisal Al‑Qassimi Moderator Maha M. — COREangels MEA The conversation will explore: • What LPs are truly underwriting in emerging managers today • Where structural constraints — not talent — limit fund performance • How new managers can build defensible edge in portfolio construction, signalling, and partnerships • What must change for emerging funds to graduate into durable institutions Who should attend Emerging fund managers, LPs, DFIs, and ecosystem builders focused on shaping Africa & MENA’s next generation of venture capital — with discipline, not hype. ASVLP 2026 Participation is FREE but strictly by invitation. To join: Repost and comment #ASVLP2026 — your registration link will be sent via DM. This Session is Powered by COREangels MEA

40

12 Comments

SF VC Takeaway #2: Pricing expectations, performance bars, and what’s actually getting funded. One theme that came up repeatedly in SF was how far pricing expectations and performance bars have shifted, even compared to just a few years ago. A few things investors kept anchoring to: 1️⃣ Median Series A valuations are higher than their 2021 peaks, but fewer of them are getting done. 2️⃣ Capital is being concentrated into fewer and fewer companies (and lots of capital!) 3️⃣ “Good” progress is no longer enough and the bar for standout performance has moved in an AI-native world So what does “top performance” mean right now? One investor told me that top quartile seed companies in their portfolio are going from $0 to $2M in ARR in <12 months. Outside of pure traction numbers, a few other themes that came up to describe "top performance": 📈 Explosive early revenue ramps (or a very credible path to them) 📊 Strong velocity and momentum for 2 quarters in a row, even if the baseline is small. 🚀 Clear signals of category leadership, not just product-market fit. Sometimes shown by either domain expertise, speed of product optimization, or by lack of competition in the category. This creates a counterintuitive dynamic where it can be easier to fund a company with strong pedigrees in a hot space and no traction yet than a company that went from 0 to $1M ARR at what used to be considered a rapid pace. Pricing today is driven by trajectories, not moments in time. We used to say investors invest in lines not points; I think that's more true than ever now because crossing certain milestones doesn't carry as much influence as it once did. Finally, investors still say that valuation matters, but many of them are acting differently. Pace and belief in category-defining companies really sets the price; while slower growth gets scrutinized rather than discounted. One silver lining in the camp of durable growth: Series A rounds are happening so fast that many companies don’t yet have meaningful history of retention data. Large bets are being made on velocity before the durability is proven. Several investors told me the same thing: we may soon swing back to a market where retention, not growth, becomes the defining metric. Let's hope so. I'll share my third SF VC takeaway tomorrow!

59

7 Comments

Micro, Meso, and Macro: How Start-ups Are Shaped Start-ups do not operate in isolation. Their formation, growth, and survival are shaped by influences operating at three levels: micro, meso, and macro. Understanding how these layers interact is central to explaining why some ecosystems mature coherently while others remain active but fragile. The micro level sits closest to the venture. It includes founders, teams, internal governance, early customers, product discipline, and execution capability. These factors directly affect how decisions are made and how quickly learning occurs. Evidence across entrepreneurship research shows that micro-level strength matters, but it functions within constraints it does not control, such as regulation, market access, and capital structure. The macro level defines those constraints. Regulation, capital markets, labour mobility, infrastructure, education systems, and national development strategies shape what types of ventures can realistically form, scale, and exit. Publicly available ecosystem research indicates that consistent policy signals, regulatory clarity, and credible exit pathways are associated with more durable entrepreneurial activity, independent of individual founder talent. Between these two sits the meso layer, which acts as the system’s connective tissue. Accelerators, incubators, venture studios, universities, angel networks, corporate innovation units, and ecosystem builders translate macro intent into micro-level action. This layer influences selection, norms, and narratives. Its impact is indirect and therefore harder to measure, and public data on its effectiveness remains limited. Ecosystem reports and commentary suggest that misalignment most often appears at the meso level. When early-stage logic is applied indiscriminately across all phases of venture development, later-stage needs such as governance maturity, institutional readiness, and exit infrastructure can remain underdeveloped. Activity increases, but structural depth does not always follow. Takeaways Micro capability, meso translation, and macro structure are interdependent, not interchangeable. Most ecosystem distortion emerges when the meso layer exceeds or confuses its role. NSR is reflected when each layer acts within its remit and reinforces, rather than replaces, the others. https://lnkd.in/eGfBW_KN (Papi & Laado) SVC - Misk Foundation - Ministry of Economy and Planning - MEPsaudi -theGarage - Startup Studio National Technology Development Program - Public Investment Fund (PIF) #Venturecapital - KAUST Core Labs - National Development Fund (NDF)

2

The Hidden Lever of Scale: Hire Right When founders talk about scaling, the spotlight often falls on capital, product, & process. But the real accelerant—or drag—is people. Who you hire, when you hire them, & how well they fit the next stage dictates whether you grow or stall. People Decisions Matter The leap from 0→1 (finding PMT) to 1→10 (codifying growth) is not just headcount—it’s transforming leadership, structure, & capability. Hires shape culture & momentum. Get it wrong, & you accumulate culture debt, cash burn, & complexity that slows you down when speed matters most. Fitness Beats Pedigree Future success = previous success × fitness-for-stage. - Fitness isn’t about titles or pedigree—it’s adaptability, resilience, & context fit. - Bias toward potential over tenure; experience alone often fails in high-change environments. Map the Talent for Scale The archetypes shift as you scale: - 0→1 thrives on innovators and generalists. - 1→10 wins with operators and managers who can run, improve, and align systems. - Hiring is sequencing—get the archetypes right for each stage or risk stalling at 1→10 after nailing 0→1. Culture as Capital Culture isn’t a poster—it’s what people do every day. Every hire either amplifies or erodes that operating system. Hire for cadence—clarity, communication, accountability—so growth compounds instead of friction . The Best Hires Share One Thing They have validated exceptional contribution to your current or next stage of growth. That validation can come from: - Personal experience working with them. - Endorsement from someone you deeply respect. - Proven performance at a previous company at the same stage that you regard as best-in-class. Anything less? Risk rises exponentially. A Founder’s Fitness Test Before every hire, ask: - Stage Fit: Innovator or scaler? - Self-Scaling: Can they grow systems and people without losing speed? - Culture Amplifier: Will they raise the bar on clarity and accountability? - Role Clarity: Are responsibilities explicit to drive aligned autonomy? - Fitness Over Tenure: Does their trajectory suggest future success in this context? One More Lesson From my experience as a founder & investor—the American VC mantra of “hire ahead of the curve” carries risk in Africa. Here, every dollar has to sweat harder. Hiring must align with cash runway & burn to a credible next raise. Over-hiring too early can kill momentum faster than under-hiring. Scaling is a marathon, not a sprint. I started with 2 people to 250 across five countries—and back to 40 across three markets. Hardest lessons? Hiring mistakes are costly. Clarity and cadence win. Fitness—for stage & culture—is what compounds success. What’s been your biggest win, learning, or mistake in scaling teams from 1→10? Drop your thoughts below #ScalingStartups #Leadership #FounderLessons #StartupGrowth #TeamBuilding #CultureMatters #HiringStrategy #ScaleUp #GrowthLeadership #StartupLife #AfricanStartups #VCInsights

18

1 Comment