TheOnePoint

John Rikhtegar of RBCx has been dissecting the venture ecosystem with surgeon-level precision lately.Two of his recent analyses — on GP-LP alignment and VC-backed IPOs — pull back the curtain on where real returns (and misalignments) hide.Takeaways:▪️ The Alignment Mirage→ “Even if you have perfect alignment, it doesn’t guarantee success.”Small funds look better aligned — lower fees, higher carry exposure — but alignment alone doesn’t produce outperformance. Only 1 in 20 funds (top 5%) actually hit the mythical 3x net. For most LPs, that’s a sobering recalibration.▪️ Fee Math vs. Fund Math→ A $50M fund with 2% fees earns $10M in guaranteed income over 10 years.A $500M fund? $100M.The large fund could underperform and still make partners rich. That’s the structural irony John highlights — wealth certainty grows as performance risk shrinks.▪️ The Power Law Follows You→ “The same power law that defines venture private markets continues after IPO.”John analyzed 414 North American VC-backed IPOs from 2010–2022.Result: the top decile averaged +400% after three years.The bottom 70% traded below IPO price — median return: -57%.The few still carry the many, even in the public markets.▪️ Cycles, Not Curves→ “Venture liquidity is less a sine curve, more a sawtooth wave.”Half of all exit value in the last decade came from just two years — 2020 and 2021.Venture isn’t about timing perfection; it’s about vintage discipline — staying in the game long enough for the next liquidity spike.John’s worldview is empirical, not romantic.Alignment matters — but selection and structure matter more.The real alpha sits where incentives, discipline, and data intersect.Important links:John's LinkedIn post on Small Fund and Alignment: http://bit.ly/47agoFXJohn's LinkedIn post on Power Law post IPO: http://bit.ly/475pAvcJohn's LinkedIn profile:RBCx Ventures: https://www.rbcx.com/Topics that we discussed: (00:00) Episode intro and overview of TheOnePoint “Brain Snacks” format(00:38) Guest introduction – John Rikhtegar, Director of Capital Investments at RBCx(01:10) What is RBCx and its role in Canada’s innovation ecosystem(02:20) Understanding how fund size shapes venture alignment(04:45) Breaking down the basics of fund economics and incentives(07:10) Why alignment matters—but doesn’t always lead to stronger outcomes(09:40) How longer private company lifecycles affect venture timelines(12:20) What limited partners look for when selecting fund managers(14:40) How fees fit into the overall venture evaluation process(17:40) Comparing post-investment support in venture and private equity(21:50) Exploring power-law dynamics in VC-backed public listings(25:40) Early indicators of durable public-market performance(29:00) Market cycles, timing, and lessons for long-term investors(32:40) Understanding liquidity cycles in venture capital(36:10) Assessing the current market environment in 2025(38:00) Key takeaways – alignment, discipline, and perspective in venture investing

The headlines on American manufacturing have it wrong.The story isn’t just about tariffs or reshoring incentives.The real headline is the trillion-dollar number — the annual investment required to double U.S. manufacturing capacity. That’s more than the GDP of Switzerland.This is just one of the highlights from my thought-provoking chat with Aidan Madigan-Curtis from Eclipse (Links at the end). Before Eclipse, she was an executive at Samsara and the manufacturing lead for the Apple Watch— bringing deep expertise in supply chains and what it will take to rebuild U.S. manufacturing.And here’s another kicker: even if the money shows up, the U.S. is still short 5 million skilled workers. That’s why building projects are delayed not by chips or capital, but by the lack of plumbers, electricians, and technicians.This isn’t just a finance problem. It’s structural.▪️ Supply chains span thousands of miles.▪️ 90% of rare earth magnets are processed in China.▪️ Chips made here are still packaged and tested overseas.Without fixing these bottlenecks, new factories risk becoming expensive paperweights.Two truths can coexist:▪️ The opportunity is enormous.▪️ The obstacles are real.The easy take is to call this push a subsidy bubble. The deeper truth: these dollars are pouring concrete, training workers, and laying the backbone for the next century of energy, defense, and compute.The better analogy isn’t tariffs — it’s the Bessemer process. When Andrew Carnegie brought it to the U.S., it dropped steel costs 10x and fueled the modern economy.The question isn’t whether America re-industrializes. It’s about how the HardTech startup industry can plug into the gaps and achieve stellar outcomes for the U.S. economy.Checkout the links Aidan Madigan-Curtis: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aidan-madigan-curtis/Eclipse: https://eclipse.capital/Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/Article 1: What Would It Take to Bring Back U.S. Manufacturing? Part 1: America’s Structural Headwinds. Link – Article 2: What Would It Take to Bring Back U.S. Manufacturing? Part 2: Making American Manufacturing More Productive Article 3: The Future of Domestic Manufacturing. Link:

For years, the startup promise was simple:Join early. Take less salary. Share in the upside.It sounded like a fair trade — until the fine print appeared.The real challenge? When paper equity meets real-world tax and timing rules.With Andrew Endicott of Gilgamesh Ventures, we explored the hidden complexities of startup compensation — and how perception and structure don’t always align.Founders often share the dream of “owning part of the company.”But in most cases, employees receive an option to buy shares later — typically with a 90-day exercise window, limited financial visibility, and little immediate liquidity.It’s not about blame — it’s about design.And it’s a system that can work better for everyone.▪️ Optimism ≠ UnderstandingMost founders aren’t experts in capitalization tables.Most employees aren’t trained to interpret preferred-stock structures.And between those two optimistic groups, value can quietly fade — not in exits, but in expiration dates.▪️ Liquidity as a ChallengeA strike price isn’t cash. Options can’t easily be financed.When departing a startup requires paying to keep your shares, the structure itself may need updating.▪️ A Smarter Equity ModelAndrew’s perspective isn’t about disruption — it’s about refinement.✅ Extend exercise periods beyond 90 days.✅ Consider granting stock directly, with companies covering related taxes where feasible.✅ Redefine ownership as genuine participation, not just potential upside.Because true equity should reward contribution — transparently and fairly.Startups aspire to reshape industries.Perhaps the next evolution is reshaping how they share success with the people who help create it.Topics covered in the podcast:(00:00) Episode intro – Rohit introduces TheOnePoint Podcast and guest Andrew Endicott(01:01) Inside Gilgamesh Ventures – investing in the future of global fintech(02:48) U.S. and international portfolio – why Latin America is a growth hub(04:16) Fintech’s comeback and today’s topic: the evolution of employee ownership(05:02) Understanding startup equity – how tax rules shape employee stock options(08:23) Why employee stock options don’t always deliver expected value(11:34) The communication gap – why equity education matters for teams(16:10) How founders can create clarity and transparency in equity discussions(18:54) Exercising stock options – timing, financing, and employee planning(23:05) Rethinking company policy – extending exercise periods and real ownership(24:51) Exploring common stock models and how tax support can help employees(31:21) Lessons from leading companies – approaches to long-term employee rewards(36:39) Key takeaways – building fair and transparent equity structuresReach out to us: Andrew Endicott: https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewendicott/Gilgamesh Ventures: https://www.gilgameshvc.com/Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/

Who doesn’t love a hustle story? Especially in venture capital.This one starts in 2009, with Jared Carmel helping a Facebook employee cash out their stock options. Fast forward: he’s now running Manhattan Venture Partners, a $1.5B secondaries powerhouse — ranked top 5 in the U.S.And here’s the punchline:Venture’s old playbook — fund startups, wait for the IPO, call it liquidity — is broken.The real shift? Secondaries.👉 Companies stay private for 20 years.👉 Employees can’t wait that long to pay their bills.👉 Wall Street is piling in, discounts collapsing from 55% to 13%.This is the biggest structural shift in venture capital history.As Jared says:“You can’t have innovation without rewarding the people building it. If public markets won’t do that job anymore—secondaries will.”🔥 Watch the full episode to see why secondaries aren’t just the future of liquidity… they’re the new foundation of venture capital.

I’ve been waiting for this one. What do - two decades of startup investing, the European moment, democratisation of venture capital, and growth stage opportunity - have in common? It’s the VC firm redalpine!The most interesting thing about European venture right now isn’t just the startups being built. It’s the setup investors are staring at.On the surface, the story looks familiar: macro noise, cautious LPs, regulation debates. But underneath, the ingredients for one of the strongest vintages in decades are aligning.Here’s why Michael Sidler (Founding Partner) calls this “the best VC market setup I’ve seen in 20 years”:(1) Valuation Gap. Public markets are frothy again. Private valuations are still compressed. That gap doesn’t stay open forever.(2) IPO Window. Klarna’s NYSE debut wasn’t just liquidity—it was a psychological shift. It reminded founders, GPs, and LPs that belief is back.(3) Capital Flows. Rates are heading down. Liquidity is moving back into risk assets. Public equities already feel priced in. Private equity and venture stand to benefit.(4) Crisis Vintage Effect. The best VC vintages are often born in rough patches. 2022 was painful; 2025 could be the payoff.(5) Europe’s Deep Tech Edge. When Princeton gave up on building precision magnets for a fusion plant, German engineers pulled it off. Europe’s strength lies where software meets engineering—and AI is about to amplify that.(6) Democratization. Redalpine’s Summit Fund is part of a new wave of evergreen, semi-liquid VC products. For LPs and private banks, it’s a way in without the closed-end fund headache. Venture as an asset class is coming of age.This isn’t a victory lap. Michael’s own words: “It’s like standing in front of the goal. The keeper has slipped. You still have to put the ball in.”For Michael, venture isn’t just capital—it’s culture. The dot-com scars left European institutions risk-averse. But a new generation of founders (and now LPs) see startups as rock stars, not pity cases. The asset class is coming of age.And if you care about European tech, this might be the most interesting setup we’ve had in two decades.Chapters in the podcast:(00:00) Episode introduction and overview of the strategic VC report(00:35) Guest introduction: Michael Sidler’s background and early career(01:19) Founding story of Redalpine and lessons from early venture years(04:31) Portfolio highlights: N26, Taxfix, Inkit, La Quera, Proxima Fusion, Araris(06:25) Investment philosophy: focusing on founders and unique innovation(09:44) Why the current moment is strong for European venture capital(14:37) Technology trends: AI, deep tech, and Europe’s global opportunities(19:54) Funding landscape: early-stage growth and late-stage opportunities(22:32) Understanding the role of institutional investors in Europe(26:18) Success factors for European founders expanding internationally(28:19) Global market dynamics and new areas of technology focus(34:35) Venture innovation: Redalpine’s Summit Fund and evergreen model(39:47) Growing interest in venture as a long-term asset class(43:59) How different investors approach venture capital opportunities(45:14) Looking ahead: Redalpine’s vision for the future of European VCConnect with us:Michael Sidler: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sidler/redalpine: https://www.redalpine.com/Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/

Ten years ago, investing in US supply chain and manufacturing tech felt like swimming against the tide. Non-consensus, long sales cycles, hardware risk — most VCs stayed away.Today? We’re in the middle of a reindustrialization moment. And Jackie DiMonte, co-founder of Grid Capital, explained it better than anyone on my recent podcast:Reindustrialization isn’t just a policy slogan. It’s the collision of two forces:Platform shifts: AI and automation have finally made the ROI undeniable for manufacturers who once saw tech as “nice to have.”People shifts: 2.5M boomer-owned businesses are changing hands, often to digital-native operators who see software as default, not optional.Add in geopolitics, the CHIPS Act, COVID supply shocks — and you get momentum that’s reshaping how and where America builds.The data proves it: new construction spend for manufacturing has tripled since 2020, peaking at $240B before settling near $225B. Even “slowing” looks like an entirely new baseline.And startups? They’re no longer fringe players. There are 30x more industrial tech unicorns today than a decade ago. That means the talent base, the alumni founders, the playbooks — all of it has multiplied.Jackie’s key advice for founders: don’t chase the big, vague transformation pitch. Anchor yourself in a control point — one measurable ROI use case that proves value in months, not years. That’s how you break through risk aversion and win adoption in industries built on caution.The vibe has shifted. Industrial tech isn’t the overlooked cousin of SaaS anymore. It’s where some of the most durable, meaningful companies of the next decade will be built.We talked about her LinkedIn posts on the reindustrialization topic that continue to gain traction recentlyThe U.S. continues building new manufacturing capacity, and critically in electronics (Link)Despite the headlines—AI, robotics, reindustrialization—most of U.S. manufacturing is still moving in the wrong direction (Link)Over the past decade, the number of billion-dollar industrial tech startups have grown 25x (Link)Jackie was a thoughtful guest, and we managed to cover a lot of ground in just 30 minutes. I think you’ll enjoy this conversation as much as I did — links below to listen in!Connect with us:Jackie DiMonte: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jdimonte/Grid Capital: https://www.gridcap.com/Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/

The most puzzling thing about Blitzhire acquisitions isn’t that they’re expensive.It’s that they’re deliberately inefficient.Billions flow through structures that make zero financial sense—unless you’re one of a handful of AI giants racing at breakneck speed.Here’s the playbook Villi Iltchev unpacked on TheOnePoint Podcast:▪️ Instead of acquiring the company, buyers pay billions for a non-exclusive license to its IP (exclusive would trigger regulators).▪️ Then they layer on billion-dollar retention packages for founders and researchers—sometimes valuing a single engineer at $100M.▪️ Finally, they leave nine-figure sums on the balance sheet so the “shell” company still looks alive to antitrust eyes.Grossly inefficient? Absolutely. Hundreds of millions get burned in taxes and leakage.But for the Googles of the world, time matters more than money. They don’t want regulators dragging a deal out for a year while rivals stack AI talent.Blitzhire is the new acquihire—but only for the top 3–5 labs with trillions at stake. For everyone else, the M&A market remains sluggish, IPOs aren’t “closed” but repriced, and SaaS exits are harder than ever.It’s corporate Darwinism in slow motion: survival velocity for the giants, stagnation for the rest.Topics that we covered (00:00) Episode intro and guest introduction – Villi Iltchev of Category Ventures(00:48) What is Category Ventures? Fund size, focus, and thesis(01:54) Why Villi started Category – solving the “subscale VC” problem(04:46) Category’s ability to lead rounds and bring certainty for founders(05:49) Emotional side of running a new VC firm in a frothy AI market(08:28) What is a Blitzhire acquisition? Origins and mechanics explained(13:48) Structuring Blitzhire deals – IP licenses, retention packages, and keeping shells alive(16:19) Why Blitzhires are grossly inefficient but deliver speed(17:10) Will more Blitzhire deals happen? Comparing AI to the mobile war(20:13) Acquihires then vs Blitzhires now – from $1M per engineer to $100M per researcher(21:59) The state of IPOs and why pricing, not access, is the issue(25:30) M&A dynamics: why big buyers prefer large targets, not smaller SaaS firms(27:15) What’s next for Category Ventures – building brand and reputation over timeSocial linksVilli Iltchev: https://www.linkedin.com/in/villi04/Category Ventures: https://www.categoryvc.com/Rohit Yadav: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rohityadav23/

Until recently, “venture capital in India” was shorthand for consumer apps, low-cost data, and billion-user TAM slides. Payments, e-commerce, food delivery. Then came a different kind of story.Leo Capital.In just a few years, it has built four funds and is actively investing across the U.S., Europe, Southeast Asia, and, of course, India — and stitched together a thesis that quietly rewires how Indian talent gets backed. They call it Global Indian Alpha.On paper, that phrase looks like branding. In practice, it’s a structural edge.➰ Consider LambdaTest. Seeded when it was just a concept, now $50M+ ARR with an AI-driven pivot executed in six months.➰ Consider Atoa Payments. Inspired by UPI in India, applied to open banking in the UK, cutting merchant fees in half.➰ Across the portfolio, 70+ companies spanning India, the US, and Europe.None of this is about chasing hype cycles. It’s about building a platform that can diligence a founder in San Francisco on Monday and their co-founder in Bangalore on Tuesday — in person, not just on Zoom. Few funds can do that.The Indian startup story most outsiders know, changing but is still largely domestic: consumer scale, policy tailwinds, IPO windows.What Leo is showing is the second chapter: India not as a market, but as a global talent engine. 40M diaspora, second only to the US in unicorn founder count, now building cross-border companies from day one.This isn’t the cliché of “India is the next China.” It’s the less flashy, more durable reality: capital efficiency honed in Bangalore, scaled in Silicon Valley, monetized in London.Venture capital usually talks in abstractions — “moats,” “founder love,” “operating edge.” What we’re seeing here is rarer: an actual playbook that converts India’s talent diaspora into measurable portfolio outcomes.The punchline? In venture, as in software, the real narrative inversion doesn’t happen when you shout louder. It happens when you quietly build the muscle others haven’t yet noticed.Great chatting with Shwetank Verma from Leo Capital.Two of his quotes stayed with me:“The more you do this kind of cross-border investing, the more you build that cultural muscle.”“We felt that there was nobody really playing for this global India play.”

Noah Lichtenstein has a simple but sharp take on venture right now:Capital is commoditized. Edge comes from operators.The irony is hard to ignore. Venture used to pride itself on sourcing the next big thing before anyone else. Now? Most funds are chasing the same deals, and the only real differentiator is whether a founder wants you in the room.Crossover’s bet is that founders want people who’ve been there. The ones who scaled Databricks, Instacart, Perplexity, Lattice. Operators turned investors who act as magnets for the next generation of builders.But underneath the narrative are some uncomfortable truths Noah calls out:Aggregation of capital: 79% of venture dollars last year went to just 30 firms. Call it the “Blackstonification” of venture — giant funds hoovering capital while returns concentrate in a few hands.Family offices’ dilemma: everyone wants direct startup access, but without asymmetric information you’re usually “the last to know.” If Sequoia just preempted the round, why would you get the invite?Too many emerging managers: post-ZIRP, everyone wanted to spin up a fund. The harsh reality? Unless you’re in the tiny sliver of outlier funds, you’d be better off in the S&P 500.Portfolio construction as strategy: writing 25K angel checks doesn’t prove you can win allocations when the check needs to be $1M+. Moving up the pyramid is brutally hard.So where does this head? A few downstream consequences Noah sees:(1) Specialization beats generalization. Unless you’re Sequoia or Benchmark, the generalist VC is in decline. Right to win now means domain expertise + operating scars.(2) Data as a filter. With exposure to ~1,000 seed-stage companies, Crossover tracks 120+ data points to find the 10–15% worth leaning into. Signal in the noise becomes survival.(3) Excellence compounds. Their dinner series brings billion-dollar founders, seed-stage builders, and even pro athletes into the same room. No agenda — just a flywheel of ambition and ideas.Venture may not be “dead,” but it’s undeniably reshaping. Scale sits at the top, but edge lives at the bottom — with the operators, networks, and small funds that still feel like craft.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about what really drives systemic change in venture — not lofty slogans, but the small, structural choices that compound into outsized impact.At Alma Angels, a few patterns keep showing up. They look tactical in the moment, but in hindsight, they’re transformative:▪️ Measure impact in deals, not press.A traditional syndicate might do 5–15 investments a year. Alma Angels did 68 last year alone. Scale matters.▪️ Start at the cap table.Wealth at the early stage is created as a founder or as an investor. If women aren’t in those positions, they’re locked out of the biggest driver of wealth creation.▪️ Design away bias.Instead of one syndicate lead deciding, every deal is open to all members. With 550+ angels, bias gets diluted and different kinds of companies get a shot.▪️ Community is capital.The biggest value-add isn’t always the largest check. Founders point to Alma angels as the most helpful on their cap table — doors opened, not just money wired.▪️ Broadening who gets funded compounds returns.Women-founded businesses deliver 78% ROI vs. 31% for all-male teams. Less capital, more creativity, faster profitability — the math is on their side.▪️ Play long-term games.This isn’t about a single round. It’s about building 10,000 angels backing 1,000 companies every year — and generating $1 trillion in women-led wealth by 2050.The lesson: systemic change doesn’t happen in headlines. It happens in repeated behavior, in how capital is allocated, in who gets the chance to build.