What the Hosts Are Actually Judging
Between pitches the hosts articulate their real evaluation criteria, which turn out to have little to do with the deck. Shaan wants to help a rocket already in motion rather than push something at a standstill. Sam warns that charisma is a two-way signal — his best and worst investments both came from charismatic CEOs. Both note the structural disadvantage non-native English speakers face, and Shaan explains that the 'how do you get to $100M' question is really a test of whether the founder has ever done the math before.
- Shaan: needing the investor to supply the strategy is usually a bad sign for the investment.
- Sam: best and worst investments both traced to charismatic CEOs — charm cuts both ways.
- Non-native English speakers are at a real structural disadvantage; the hosts argue the deck and story must carry more of the load as a universal language.
- The $100M question tests whether the math is recalled or invented on the spot.
- Founders should give downside protection (a concrete worst-case multiple) and an honest ceiling, not an evasive 'we're not thinking about an exit'.
- Calibration: downside answers land on angels investing their own money; institutional VCs need the energy on the upside.
- Co-founder pitching hygiene: agree in advance who fields technical versus growth questions, so deferral looks deliberate.
“i want to be helping a rocket that's already going and not like pushing something that's at a standstill”
“we don't do public math but we sure as hell make founders do public math when they pitch us”