Welcome to Slow Ventures’ Snailmail, where we unpack what’s on our partners’ minds every Sunday.
TL;DR:
Other news:
The Co-Founder Myth: Why Investors Love It (But You Should Ignore It)
Sam Lessin
Context:
For the last decade, tech incubators and scaled seed investors have basically made having a co-founder a gospel: “Show me your founding team. Who are your co-founders?” If you’ve ever pitched at a YC Demo day or any of the big seed shops, you know the drill. But why is this such a big deal?
Spoiler: it’s not about your company’s long-term success—it’s about their need for shortcuts and risk reduction at scale.
Here’s the dirty little secret: when you’re running a seed fund or an incubator at scale, you don’t have time to diligence every “kid with an idea.” So, you reach for easy signals. Can this person recruit? Has anyone else with a pulse and a LinkedIn profile co-signed this madness? If the answer is yes, great! The investor feels a little less crazy writing that first check.
But here’s the flip side: does having co-founders actually make your company better, or does it just make VCs feel better? My take: usually, it’s the latter.
Why?
Speed and Execution: Startups live and die on execution. You can’t afford endless debates or consensus-building. Someone needs to be in charge, fast. In reality, that means a single real founder. Sure, at Google-scale, diversity of thought is nice, but in the early innings? It’s a luxury you can’t afford.
Leadership (aka Balls): Founding groups of “equals” are often a sign that nobody’s willing to actually put their name and reputation on the line. You need one leader—and, yes, followers. “Co-founder” is a nice title, but it doesn’t signal who’s really leading.
Hard Calls, Hard Conversations: Even if you start as a group, someone eventually has to be the asshole and say, “This is my company.” Equal splits and endless consensus don’t win. Aggression, ownership, and the willingness to make the hard calls do.
Bottom line: Having a bunch of co-founders is a great way for investors to avoid looking stupid at the seed stage. But if you want to build something truly great, you probably want one real founder, and maybe a few people with 5% and a title if you feel like it. Don’t let the cult of the co-founder distract you from what actually moves the needle.
Market Signal: If you’re fundraising, yes, having a co-founder can help you clear the first filter. But don’t confuse that with what it takes to actually build and win. Investors are looking for easy signals. You should be looking for what actually works.
Creator CEO Resources (and My First Newsletter)
Billy Parks
Context:
Back in July, I shared some thoughts on LinkedIn about how so many creator summits and “top 100” lists overlook the folks who care most about ownership — the creators who are building for the long term, not just chasing the next viral hit. That essay struck a chord, and, more importantly, it set the stage for what came next: our first Creator CEO Summit with The Lighthouse this past September.
We brought together a group that doesn’t fit the usual “content for content’s sake” mold. These were operators, industry leaders, and creators who are building real companies, leveraging direct distribution, and thinking deeply about what to build — not just what to post. The day was filled with honest, tactical, and sometimes raw conversations. The kind of dialogue I wish happened more in our ecosystem.
Market Signal
The resonance of that initial post and the energy at the summit are clear signals: There’s a growing cohort of creators (and those who back them) who want to move beyond the engagement treadmill. They’re hungry for open, candid frameworks and resources that help them scale from “creator” to “Creator CEO.” The appetite for tactical, actionable insight — not just high-level inspiration — is real and underserved.
The exact conversations we had at our first Creator CEO Summit, its now available online, for everyone to access for free.
Takeaways
There’s a gap in resources for creators who want to build companies, not just audiences.
The best conversations happen when information and playbooks aren’t locked behind closed doors.
The next generation of creator businesses will be built by those who prioritize ownership, distribution, and scalable products — not just engagement metrics.
Community and collaboration matter: the summit thrived because people showed up willing to learn, challenge, and share honestly.
Asks
I’d love your input as we plan the next Creator CEO Summit for January 2026. Who do you want to hear from? Which conversations are still missing?
Venture’s Dirty Secret: Nobody Wants to Price Your Round
Will Quist
Context:
I’ve been in enough late-stage fundraising conversations to know the quiet part everyone’s thinking but rarely says out loud: nobody in bulge bracket venture really wants to price things. The big funds don’t want to do the hard work of figuring out what a company is actually worth in this market. Instead, they’re looking for a simple justification to pay 3-5x more than the last round. The logic? “Well, the last group paid $X, and now the company’s bigger, so I’ll pay $3X (or $5X).” That’s the game.
Market Signal:
This is a signal about how risk is being managed (or avoided) at the top of the venture stack. Rather than price discovery or real diligence, we’re seeing a herd mentality: “Just show me the evidence to justify a markup, and I’m in.” This is as much about optics as it is about fundamentals.
Takeaways:
If you’re a founder, internalize this: your next round’s price is anchored to your last round’s price. The burden is on you to make the markup easy to justify.
Don’t just talk about growth—bring receipts. Show the metrics, milestones, and market shifts that make a 3x+ step-up look obvious.
If you’re an investor or operator, recognize that this dynamic creates both opportunities (for those who can break the pattern) and risks (for those who follow it blindly).
More Musing From The Team