Good morning 👋

It’s officially March, my lease is up at the end of the week, and I’m two days behind on getting this email out.

Last month, I toyed around with a new format where I shared the condensed version of my Apple Notes from the previous month. I got a lot of positive feedback from readers, so this is the latest installment of that monthly style of content.

Without further ado, here is a collection of the most interesting things I learned over the past ~30 days.

P.S. We have refined the thesis for Outlaw and have created a 25-page report that maps out the philosophies that guide our investing, the themes we think will matter most over the next 10-15 years, and the types of out-of-distribution founders we look to back.

More on all of that + the fund can be found at the bottom of this email.

Investing notes

On the future of Pareto principle

“Over the past 20 years or so, 80 percent of the results were derived by 20% of the workers at the firm. In the future? It’s going to be 95% and 5%. If you were above average at 2-3 tasks, you just made 1-2 different roles at the firm redundant. Since you can use AI tools to get what you want (faster than asking those two average performers) there is no point in keeping them.”

Bowtied Bull

“He protected the mission when abandoning it would have been easier.”

That response reveals what separates the two very different types of founders: Missionary and mercenary.

“Mercenary pitches have tells. They're full of finance nouns: valuation, exit, multiple, comps. They describe customers as a route rather than a relationship. They frame the business like a trade they're executing.”

“Missionary founders structure their pitch differently. They light up when describing the problem, not the market size. Customer wins feel like personal victories. They talk about what their team built and how to support growth.”

Three charts on the global intelligence crisis

Notes on how to build a VC firm

If your reputation is not riding on your fund, you have not risked enough to make it work. Many first-time managers I meet make the mistake that they want to somehow spare their reputation if their fund doesn't work out.”

“You should be tracking everything. Your discussions, your misses, use AI to record and analyze your pitch meetings. You should be reviewing what the biggest deals in the industry were, why they were successful, crystallizing theories about what succeeded and why. You should be studying the great investors before you and the profiles that made them successful.

“Most investors don't bother. They basically "vibe invest." Their success often boils down to how lucky their network happens to make them. That might work for a while, but luck is not a strategy, and it doesn't compound the way that ruthless optimization does.”

“A badly managed company will eventually collapse or be outcompeted. But venture is a power law business, and usually only a few people are making that power law happen. So long as those few people are able to do their work, a VC can continue to survive even while being poorly managed. But being managed well is an edge in the long run. It allows you to retain your best talent and grow them beyond the original partners. VC firms famously suck at generational transfer and elevating existing talent, and partners are often terrified to hire juniors who are smarter than they are.”

The trend is not your friend. Every cycle has a narrative that feels irresistible. A category that's so hot that every other pitch deck is about it, every conference panel is about it, and every LP is asking you about it. You will feel pressure--from your team, from your LPs, from Twitter--to pile into whatever the theme of the moment is. And every cycle, most of those themes turn out to be a waste of money.

“But the flipside of trend following is that you inevitably end up with a portfolio of "what was popular 18 months ago," which is the single worst portfolio construction strategy imaginable. Your job is to invest in what will matter in 3 to 5 years, and hot markets are reliably incapable of thinking that far ahead.”

VC is the business of branding money. You win a deal by convincing a founder that your money is better than someone else’s. In reality, everyone's money is green.”

“Fundraising is an art of its own, and it depends wildly on who you’re raising from. Fundraising from family offices is all about relationships. These are multigenerational wealth dynasties with their own idiosyncrasies, and it takes time to build trust with them. They are very social proof driven. Institutions and funds of funds are a different beast: process-driven, diligence-heavy, they are more won over by spreadsheets more than dinners. They want a track record, they want process, and they want to see a durable edge. You must learn to speak both languages to be a great fundraiser.”

Lighthouse playbook

  • The thing all startups need is preferential attachment - for the best customers, hires, and fans to all want to preferentially attach themselves to you.

  • In environments of scarcity, signal is about what you have. But in environments of abundance, the strongest signal is what you give away.

Using software in 2026

Against “taste”

“Taste comes to the party wearing Yohji Yamamoto pants and an OpenAI commercial-leadership-offsite Patagonia quarter-zip. Taste does drink, just a bit and sometimes more than a bit on weekends, but it does have a shockingly high VO2. Taste is a complete vision of what post-scarcity protein-heavy brunch looks like: shiny Accutane-and-GHK skin, emotions muted by insulin inhibitors and novel neurotoxic research chemicals.”

Will Manidis

Information contagion and echo chambers

Comically, investors are the most prone to groupthink. We are quick to recite talking points from the newest All-In Podcast or viral tweet. This happens in various echo chambers online and offline.”

“Bad information is worse than having no information.”

Chronically online-ness creates echo chambers because instead of interacting with a more diverse cast of characters, the invisible hand of the algorithm selects for ideas that do well with the vector space that represents your online existence. That vector space also further determines who you interact with, selecting for people within your bubble.”

On top-down investors

“Top Down investors have an exceptional ability to underwrite people. They intuit founder quality, ambition, and character better than the rest of the market, often through pattern recognition. Their mental model is built on prior exposure to high-caliber operators, so when they meet someone who rhymes with those archetypes, conviction forms quickly.”

Examples: Charlie Munger, Jessica Livingston, pre-seed investors, most LPs.

“If you read biographies, you're a Top Down investor.”

“A Top Down investor should avoid investing via outreach.”

“A Top Down investor's highest conviction should be in the team, not the business.”

On bottoms-up investors

“Bottom Up investors, by contrast, excel at underwriting businesses. They perceive when a company's structure, incentives, or product mechanics echo successful precedents. They speak in terms of the "shape" of a business and the underlying logic that makes it work. In their algebra, company quality is the constant, and everything else (team, narrative, etc.) can flex around it.”

Examples: Warren Buffett, Bill Gurley, most later stage investors, most public-market investors.

“If you prefer systems books (markets, networks, and history) you're Bottom Up.”

“A Bottom Up investor should not invest in referrals.”

“A Bottom Up investor's highest conviction should be in the business, not the team.”

On ego and justifying your worth as an investor

How markets work

In the short run the markets are a voting machine; in the long run the markets are a weighing machine. Every company begins its journey in the voting phase and ends its journey in the weighing phase. For investors and entrepreneurs alike, it's essential to know which machine you're in.”

On voids and what fills them

When you lose the framework that ties your daily work to a moral account of the universe, that void does not stay empty. Something else fills the house. The finance industry of the 1980s and the 1990s built a culture that was actively hostile to answering this question. Leveraged buyouts hollowed out towns, mortgage products extracted maximum value from people who could not understand them. Compensation structures rewarded quarterly execution instead of decades-long stewardship. The people doing the work were produced by institutions that had systematically selected against the instinct to ask whether the work itself was good.”

Will Manidis

Rules for being legible to capital

  1. First, there is no divide between the CEO/mgmt and the idea. The story is NOT that of an individually successful and impressive individual bringing their talents to a new platform. You can see these kind of puff piece stories in many companies that are illegible to Capital. The company is never about YOU. For a founder to be legible to Capital there can be no air between them and the expression of the idea. Their lives only matter insofar as they are building with intensity towards the pure form of the idea.

  2. Second, the company can be understood fundamentally as an equation/trade. In a best case, the most legible companies grow as a superlinear function of dollars in. The founders are highly verbal, and can clearly articulate and understand the inputs to this growth equation: talent, capital, mgmt, etc. The companies that are most legible to Capital, and the mgmt that runs them, at their best: feel like clockwork toys in the hand. Simply by looking at them the levers of progress and output become immediately clear. They are immediate, smack-you-in-the-face expressions of an idea that is both small enough that you can feel the thing click around in your hand, but cosmically large enough the idea feels True in some sense beyond literal. When the trade is immensely clear, every capital provider across the stack can immediately understand their role today-- but more importantly their ability to scale to putting 10-100-1000x the number of dollars into the thing as it reaches maturity.

  3. Finally, a company becomes legible to Capital when it is clear the entire firm (from Capital, to mgmt, to talent) is singing from the same song sheet, they are all living their lives in expression of the same exact idea.

Lessons from 3G

“He staffed his business with what Alan Greenberg, the legendary Bear Stearns CEO, called PSDs—kids who were poor, smart, and had a deep desire to get rich.“

“He wanted his best people to feel like owners, and not in some motivational-poster sense. He wanted them to have equity. Partners weren’t given shares, however. They had to buy them. Seventy percent of a new partner’s earnings went toward purchasing their stake, which they typically paid off over three years. It kept them poor enough to stay focused.

“Lemann never liked money sitting idle; it made people soft.”

“Sicupira, still CEO of Lojas Americanas, gave him advice: “You don’t know anything about beer, so for the first three years please don’t do anything dramatic. You’ll be wasting my money.” In his first 90 days, Telles fired 10% of the workforce, tore down the office’s walls, eliminated reserved parking spaces, closed the executive restaurant, and scrapped the executive-only bathrooms.

“He applied similar logic to people, borrowing from Jack Welch at GE the principle that the bottom 10% of performers should be cut every year. He began showing up at universities before graduation, searching for talent. In 1990, Brahma launched its first trainee program. The average age of the workforce dropped from 48 to 32.”

“Those close to him describe something like a photographic memory—for people especially. Names, roles, prior positions, where someone came from and where they might go. Much of the talent now flowing into 3G arrives through his network.”

“Minority stakes cannot remake a culture.”

“Most of their net worth was tied up in shares, so they took out loans, cut their personal spending, and halved the size of their São Paulo office to reduce rent.”

“Put the physical restaurants in the hands of the best local operators who can run them better, and that’ll allow us to aggressively expand our business.”

 “He quickly noticed that in countries where Burger King was doing best, the story was the same. The restaurants were being run by a local entrepreneur who knew the market and could actually speak the language. So they built a structure around that. An entrepreneur would get exclusive rights to a country and commit to aggressive development targets. Burger King would take an equity stake, keeping a seat at the table without putting up its own capital.”

“To this day, Schwartz visits Harvard and Wharton and other top business schools every year. Before arriving, he requests the resume book, studies it, and cold-emails the students he wants to meet. No other firm does this, according to Tango. Alex Sloane, an HBS graduate, told me that Schwartz’s Burger King event was one of two standing-room-only talks. The other was Joshua Kushner’s Thrive presentation. Everyone else sent their HR person.” 

“3G’s structure makes this possible. Most private equity funds have 10-year lives. Managers raise capital, charge fees, sell their companies and move on. 3G has no such clock.“

“The firm has fewer than 30 people, including a dozen partners, nearly half of whom run companies full-time. Capital sits ready. Each fund holds a single company. The partners are the largest investors in every fund. Virtually all of them started as associates. When one is invited to join the partnership, they buy in at book value, the way Goldman Sachs and Blackstone operated before they went public and got rich selling equity to strangers. Ownership in 3G will not pass to the founders’ children. It will go to the people doing the work. Tango called 3G ‘the most unique private equity business model in the landscape today’.”

“The investors match the model: a small group of family partners, many among the wealthiest in the world, who think in decades rather than fund cycles, and who have no interest in seeing their names in print.”

“The goal is to return the original capital, then let compounding run for decades. A traditional fund with a limited time horizon cannot justify planting seeds in France or training a 25-year-old to run a company. 3G can.”

Getting paid to do the obvious thing

“The idea that it's hard to beat the market is mostly trotted out by money managers. What they really mean is that it's hard to do when you manage other people's money, because it's difficult to get paid for doing the obvious thing. I think it's substantially easier than most people think for the person solely running their own cash.”

Jeremy Giffon

Obvious bets today:

  • It might be to sit on cash and wait for better companies to come along. 

  • It might be to concentrate into a tiny number of positions where you have genuine conviction, putting huge chunks of your fund into each one. 

  • It might be to buy secondaries at 50 cents on the dollar rather than paying full price for primary. 

  • It might be to not do any overpriced Series Bs at all, even if the companies are excellent, because the entry price makes the return profile unattractive at the fund size that you're now at. 

  • It might even be to return capital to LPs and let them know that the opportunity set does not justify deployment at its current pace.

You can’t have it both ways

“They want proprietary deal flow, but they also want to participate in hot rounds. They want the optionality of flexible capital, but they're operating within funds that still demand aggressive deployment periods. They're trying to manufacture value and mark that value to the same aggressive multiples that their peers would see in competitive deals, creating inflated NAVs that ultimately turn into deep value traps.”

Will Manidis

VC-backed is becoming low status

“The largest venture firms are investment banks now. They rotate out partners, force LPs into various SKUs, run corporate-backed fund strategies, all in an effort to index/foie gras innovation as much as possible while placing hands on the scale of society as much as possible. The partner with 0 carry who sits on your board is your VP at the bank who sent you deck comments. The structure, incentives, and vibes are the same.

“When the institutions are optimized to fund the legible thing and the individuals are optimized to build the legible thing, the identity of the founder itself fades. Being a founder used to carry with it the implication that you had seen something others hadn’t, that you were willing to be wrong in public about an unlikely future you believed in, and take a risk of banging your head against a wall with high career risk for a long time. Now it is almost eye-roll inducing in many non-tech circles as people struggle to distinguish Another Founder with Another Launch Video building Another (insert zeitgeist here) Startup.”

“The venture-backed startup path doesn’t have its 2008, but instead has has something more diffuse and possibly harder to reverse: cultural exhaustion.”

“The relationship between founders and their investors reflects a status shift too. Venture capitalists have been dehumanized. When firms were led by individuals with recognizable taste and conviction, founders treated allocation as something worth thinking about. Now the partners are interchangeable, the institutions behind them are interchangeable, and founders treat them accordingly. The brand halo that once justified giving a top firm a better price has been replaced by a simple question of who writes the biggest check at the highest valuation.”

“There are early cohorts of founders who will aim to find vibe-alignment with their capital. This is the bull case for more opinionated or smaller firms at the early-stage. I’m talking my own book here, but as the mission actually starts to matter again (not in the “wink-wink” sense), if a core value-add of VCs has been “brand halos”, then founders will align with investors that show an aesthetic they want to feed into their startup’s status signaling. The capital you take becomes a statement about who you are, and people will start to treat it that way.”

"People will stop building venture-backed businesses. The psyop that even though you have a data center of thousands of Nobel laureates (or engineers) at your fingertips for $200/month and some API credits you still need to raise tens of millions of dollars will start to degrade. This is a bit of a meme and I don’t think VC will die, but there might just be different distributions of outcomes or capital efficiency over time.”

Lessons from a GP (Mario @ Generalist Capital)

  • Don’t assume you know your level. New managers often think they can’t get access to rounds led by Tier 1 VCs. With the right pitch, you may be closer than you think.

  • The first investor has a unique relationship with a founder. You can build good relationships no matter when you invest, but the first check in earns a special level of trust.

  • The best investors often need little more than a sentence to explain why they’ve invested in a company. The longer and more convoluted your investment rationale is, the more skeptical you should be of it.

  • Find your pace. A generation of managers has been conditioned to deploy vintages in 18-24 months. There is nothing wrong with taking twice as long, or more.

  • Remember, the best investors in the world ≠ the best known investors. Calibrate accordingly.

  • Don’t assume the best opportunities will land in your lap. Outbound sourcing is a necessity.

  • Founders respond to conviction. Earnestly explaining to an entrepreneur why you’re excited about their business and showing a desire to move quickly can overcome any number of natural disadvantages.

  • Be careful you don’t get stuck correcting your last mistake. If you invested too little in a startup that has just started to break out, don’t triple the size of your next check to compensate. Consider each opportunity anew.

  • Underwriting the founder is > 90% of the job. Even at growth, it’s much more important than typically assumed.

  • Believe yourself to be a lucky person, and you will become one.

  • You cannot expect to underwrite founders well if you do not focus your attention on who they are. Too much time is spent on CAC/LTV and product features, and too little on the texture of someone’s mind.

  • As a small fund, founders will mentally bucket you into the “angel” category. That’s good and bad. The good is that you’re seen as more of an ally than an institution. The bad is that the default check size for angels is the $5-25K range. Find a way to grow your allocation while retaining your positioning, and you have the beginnings of a strong insurgent strategy.

  • Remember, unless you’re truly unhinged, your realistic ceiling for a company is likely many multiples too small. The best companies redefine their possibilities for their market.

  • You cannot have the same relationship with all of your founders. Some will be happy to text relatively frequently, others may disappear off the face of the Earth. Follow their lead.

Fund updates

Thesis

Chief capitalist to out-of-distribution individuals

  • We are pursuing 1.5% of a $5b businessEvery sourcing, ownership, and firm-level decision centers on that pursuit.

  • We have built an engine for finding pre-consensus talent. The most asymmetric upside belongs to those willing to identify founders before it becomes obvious in hindsight, and we've built permanent deal flow infrastructure to do exactly that.

  • The firm runs on infrastructure designed specifically for this founder persona. A 20k-reader newsletter powers the fund's sourcing, sharpens selection, and gives portfolio companies immediate access to distribution, talent, and downstream capital.

For those of you looking to get more involved, I’m happy to chat.

My calendar is linked.

Thanks for reading this far and giving us a little bit of your attention this week. Feel free to unsubscribe whenever this stops becoming valuable to you.

Reply

Avatar

or to participate

Keep Reading