Max Yoder

Pete Martin-Calling out Midwest VC risk aversion and misaligned incentives is not a character attack. It’s an accurate diagnosis. And I disagree with “we’re in this together.” Founders are the only ones going unpaid, taking existential downside, and absorbing failure. While investors collecting fees, fund managers, program operators, intermediaries, ecosystem builders, are compensated regardless of whether any founder wins. That asymmetry matters. A meaningful portion of capital here is state managed, often with higher management fees and lower carry. Top ecosystems are overwhelmingly funded by private dollars. Michigan relies far more heavily on public capital. That shifts incentives and shows up as smaller checks, lower conviction, reluctance to lead, and founders leaving the region to raise real rounds. It also shows up as tranches, reimbursements, and restricted spend because the system does not fully trust founders with capital. Then founders are expected to produce venture scale outcomes with constrained resources and assigned contractors instead of empowered teams. When it predictably doesn’t work, it reinforces the narrative that founders weren’t investable. At the same time, an entire layer of programming and intermediaries positions itself between founders and actionable capital. Activity gets rewarded. Outcomes don’t. Capital gets diluted before it reaches the builder. And then there is the theater. The ecosystem has to sell the version it hopes to become. But too often that story is built on the backs of current founders, who are asked to tolerate worse conditions today so the region can claim success tomorrow. For us to be “in this together,” current founders would need to be centered in the system we’re building, not treated as the cost of getting to a better future ecosystem.

16

7 Comments

Weather delays. Compliance gaps. Lost days and lost dollars. Every contractor knows the pain. Pavewise, based in North Dakota and built by operators who’ve lived it, has just raised a $2.5M seed round led by C2 Ventures Fund II, alongside Connetic Ventures, Service Provider Capital, M25, gener8tor 1889, and Broadwater Capital. Their platform brings real-time compliance, weather, and production tracking to road construction, helping crews make better calls, cut rework, and keep projects on time. This is exactly what we mean when we talk about our thesis, Dirty, Dull, and Dangerous innovation: solving real operational problems in essential industries with durable tech. https://lnkd.in/eecPMHdN

41

1 Comment

The most rewarding work we do as founders isn’t raising capital or signing clients. It’s helping kids in Detroit discover technology The next generation wants heroes 🦸🏾‍♂️ that look like, grew up like and think like them. As parents, we often complain that kids want to be YouTubers or TikTokers instead of NASA Scientists, Doctors etc. We complain that they stare at their phones instead of looking at or listening to us. But too often, we ask kids to dream big without showing up to support them. A student recently asked me: “What are professionals like you doing to make education in Detroit better for students like me?” I told them: “I help get Detroit high school robotics teams sponsored.” Michigan has over 600 FIRST Robotics teams, more than any other state. In Detroit, the Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation hosts 10 high school teams through the Robotics Engineering Center of Detroit, funded by The Ideal Group, Inc. This year, Team 4680, the Aztech Eagles from Cesar Chavez Academy High School, won at Wayne State University and qualified for the FIRST Robotics World Championships in Houston. They couldn’t afford to fly, so they took a bus. But they made it and had the time of their lives, thanks to support from local businesses. That’s why Eric C. from Detroit Manufacturing Systems (DMS), Alexander Montesinos and I spend our time outside of work supporting STEM students in Southwest Detroit, connecting them to the resources they need to compete with peers in better-funded districts. Their success is our success. We are building bridges between Detroit’s young inventors and local startups at Newlab like wheel.me and Penny Pickup at Kinetyc like LIVAQ, connecting students with internships where they can thrive. Kids who learn here, feel supported here, will want to work here. We are creating pathways for students to explore STEM, compete nationally, and see that careers in tech and manufacturing are not just possible, but are here right now. If you are interested in this initiative please reach out to me, Eric C. from Detroit Manufacturing Systems (DMS) or Alexander Montesinos Teams need build space and corporate sponsors. If you want to learn more about STEM opportunities in Metro Detroit, take a look at CODE313, Google Code Next Motor City Alliance Michigan Engineering Zone Black Tech Saturdays Michigan Economic Development Corporation The Michigan Office of Defense and Aerospace Innovation SHPE Detroit Professional National Society of Black Engineers Women In Defense.

67

4 Comments

It‘s access to capital, for sure. And a huge network of like-minded people who believe in scaling a startup against all odds. These kind of people are rare outside of the global tech hotspots. That doesn’t mean it is not possible. It is just so much harder to scale a startup when you’re in the midwest (where I spent my senior year of high school). When you’re in the Bay Area (where I spent my senior year of college), building the network is so much easier.

4

2 Comments

The first Vanta Frameworks for Growth interview just launched! Garry Tan from Y Combinator and I talked through lots of things, including: •  founders, how they've changed, and what YC looks for today •  vibe coding •  tractor sales in Iowa •  the age of AI, and how that's accelerating startups •  a mission to create more billionaires •  where he'd channel his intensity if he were just starting out today I'm excited for this one. Please let me know what you think!

280

11 Comments

When Kristen Moore needed capital for a custom website build, she was competing against redevelopment, acquisition, and leasing for the same budget dollars. So she built a business case. Three-year ROI came out to 46%. That got her the money. Getting alignment across 80 stakeholders required something else entirely. Here's the moment that stuck with me: Her old property pages listed three contacts: leasing agent, short-term leasing agent, property manager. Internal teams loved it. If they needed to find someone, they'd just pull up the page. But when Kristen surveyed small business owners, they said it was confusing. They wanted fewer options with clear guidance on who to call. So she simplified it to two contacts with descriptions. And got pushback. Her response: "Yes, but that's not what our audience wanted." She kept going back to the research. Even with her own leasing team. "Actually, you said you wanted this." The principle: customer research becomes your permission slip to say no. When you have data, you stop defending opinions. You start pointing to evidence. That mattered because her audience was already complex. She was building for two very different groups: brokers and in-house real estate reps who were sophisticated and wanted information fast, and small business owners who needed education along the way. The site had to serve both without confusing either. And when issues came up? Instead of going back and forth over email, she got everyone on the phone and hashed it out. Saved a lot of time. Her IT partner had been on the marketing team 13 years earlier. He moved to IT but stayed their liaison. He knew the data challenges, the systems, what marketing actually needed. Kristen said sometimes he had a better vision of what they needed to do technically than she did. So she deferred to him. That kind of trust only works when it's earned over years. Kristen also said something worth remembering: "I had to really trust the team to actually come up with that solution in a way that we could use it." Executive sponsorship opened doors. The COO had the website as his personal goal. But trust in her cross-functional partners is what got it built. Her advice for anyone running a similar project: add 20% to your budget and timeline. And never stop referencing what the customer actually asked for. Your job isn't to win arguments. It's to build what customers said they wanted. Watch the full conversation here: https://lnkd.in/exiGJPi4

25

2 Comments

Fundraising isn't dating. It's a sales funnel. And most founders don't track it, so 3 months go by while they're still "in conversations." Here's the brutal math (seed round, current selectivity): 100-200 investor outreaches → 15-20% reply rate → 15-30 first meetings → 5-10 partner meetings → 1-3 term sheets → 1 close If you're not tracking conversion at each stage, you're not fundraising. You're hoping. Founders who close faster don't have better luck. They have better systems: 1. They track the funnel weekly Where are leads dying? Outreach, first meeting, partner meeting? Each bottleneck has a different fix. 2. They iterate the narrative Every week: one sharper answer to the question that killed the last meeting. 3. They batch meetings 10 meetings in 2 weeks beats 10 meetings over 2 months. Compression creates urgency. Urgency creates leverage. 4. They treat "no" as data A fast no is worth more than a slow maybe. It frees you to find the real yes. If your fundraise feels stuck, stop asking "Who else can I talk to?" Start asking "Where is my funnel breaking?" I stress-test fundraising packages for founders. Deck, model, cap table, assumptions. You get a written findings memo and a 90-minute call showing you what breaks before investors do. Link in comments. #fundraising #seedstage #venturecapital #startups

2

1 Comment