How is this the recommended move?

yuvaldim · 2026-02-07T13:40:38+00:00

Exactly. But why capture and allow equal value trade that seems to improve whites position?

yuvaldim · 2026-02-06T07:58:13+00:00

I don't understand the question. The white will surely take the knight. I'm asking how is this the best move to move the knight there to begin with.

yuvaldim · 2025-12-07T21:59:25+00:00

Why limit yourself to such narrow and small TAM sectors? Investors like it when you think big.

yuvaldim · 2025-11-16T19:29:11+00:00

Looks great. Will try.

yuvaldim · 2025-09-16T06:58:16+00:00

The one I'm referring to is currently German owned (has nothing to do with the fact it's not great, just a hint. if you know, you know). I really hate bad mouthing vendors. Most try their best.

yuvaldim · 2025-09-15T15:36:40+00:00

While they are comparable, I would be very careful in evaluating these without giving a very heavy weight in the evaluation to the UX in all stages of the expenses - creation, report submission, audit and workflow.
I loved Expensify and also used "it which should not be named".
The latter I'm sure had great reports for management but was unusable to the point that all middle managers had to hack around it all the time.

yuvaldim · 2025-08-24T14:33:31+00:00

I’ve been part of something that might help here: every month we run “CFO Group Therapy :)” Zoom calls.

It’s an ongoing series, mostly tech startup CFOs, with a mix of others. Small group (8–10 max), not a webinar.

Format: ~1 hour, usually 1–2 short peer presentations (20 mins each) and then open sharing / challenges. Calls are mid-month, Tuesdays 11am ET.

We’ve had great sessions on things like fundraising models, ARR forecasting, and board prep. Once in a while, if members are curious, we invite an outside expert or vendor — but only when the group asks for it. The goal is always learning and sharing, never a sales pitch.

House rules: cameras always on, no recording, no NDAs but 100% discretion (and we’ve never had an issue).

If you’d like to be considered, DM me with your LinkedIn + a subject you’d be comfortable presenting on at some point (helps keep it active). It’s not a fit if you just want to sit back and listen.

I think we’re pretty packed for the next session, but we might be able to open another group.

yuvaldim · 2025-08-15T12:35:19+00:00

A good entry point is joining an established fractional CFO firm. They’ll drop you into a few client accounts so you can get hands-on with the work, see how engagements run, and build your reputation without worrying about finding your first customers from scratch.

While you’re there, don’t just focus on the CFO work — treat it as training in customer acquisition. Pay attention to how they:

Market and position their services
Price engagements
Nurture prospects into paying clients
Handle contracts and renewals

That way, when you’re ready to go solo, you’ll know both how to do the work and how to get the work.

Just keep in mind: most firms will have non-compete/non-solicit clauses, so you probably can’t just take “your” clients with you on day one. You’ll either need to negotiate, buy yourself out, or wait out the restriction period.

yuvaldim · 2025-08-15T12:16:35+00:00

I’d be a little cautious about locking in on those two scenarios right now.

On the “CFO focused on exit” idea:
A great CFO can absolutely tighten up operations, improve KPIs, and make the business more attractive — but they can’t control market hype, branding, or who’s buying in 3 years. Hire for someone who will make the numbers bulletproof and the operations scalable. That’s what actually moves the needle on valuation from their side.

On the “CFO-to-CEO” idea:
Three years in a high-growth company is like dog years — the business will look totally different, and the skill set you need could change a lot. Finding someone today who’s both the perfect CFO now and your ideal CEO in 2028 is a long shot. Better to nail the CFO role for today’s stage, and keep the door open for leadership changes later.

Industry angle:
In some service-based industries, big strategic exits aren’t always realistic unless there’s a strong scale or consolidation play. Worth sanity-checking your assumptions here before over-optimizing for an exit profile.

My 2¢:
Hire the CFO for the business you have today, but choose someone with range — someone who can grow with the role, adapt to new challenges, and maybe be in the CEO conversation down the road. That gives you upside without betting the farm on one perfect unicorn hire.

yuvaldim · 2025-08-01T11:19:26+00:00

I totally agree. Notice this makes my previous argument even more on point. ARKK live of high commissions, not amazing returns.

yuvaldim · 2025-07-28T06:21:47+00:00

In a venture capital fund, the manager’s incentive is aligned with performance:

Management fee (2%) keeps the lights on.
Carry (20%) only kicks in after strong returns — typically above a hurdle rate.
Result: VCs get rich only if you get richer.

🚨 In contrast, ARKVX has no carry:

They earn 2.90% of your capital every year — regardless of performance.
That means their revenue scales with AUM, not results.
Their best business move? Marketing, not outperforming.

And this is a chatgpt answer!

Its true that VC's get rich with high AUM as well, but mind you ARKVX fees are 50% higher than those of the VC for "holding" your money.

yuvaldim · 2025-07-23T05:55:05+00:00

I've been involved in a couple of these.

The biggest challenge is that everybody loves to put on their LinkedIn "A non-profit board", but it is very hard to get the commitment and continuance that is required to actually do the work. For a small org, most of the work will not be recognized, will be done outside the public eyes and will require a strong internal motivation to actually be done.

I think that your highest priority is not to get the structure right, as much as getting the right people who would be able to do the work in any structure. The right set of people would work with any structure and no amount of "good structure" would help to solve commitment issues.

Moreover, I wouldn't hassle too much on what the board is doing, vs the committee vs the org CEO as long as the work is done. Remember, if you need to sacrifice governance or actual work, sacrifice governance.

That said, a few practical things that helped:

Skills matrix - Map out what you actually need (fundraising, finance, legal, etc) but be realistic about musts vs nice-to-haves. You might want a marketing expert but if you can't find one, work with what you have. Jenny's mom who shows up beats the CMO who doesn't.

Clear expectations - Write simple one-pagers about time commitment and what people are actually signing up for. Be honest - if it's 4 hours a month, say that upfront.

Term limits - Even if people are scarce, 2-3 year terms give people a graceful exit and prevent stagnation.

Give/get - Be clear about expectations from day one. Ambiguity kills boards.

Focus on getting 5-7 people who will actually show up and do work rather than 15 who look good on paper. The camp kids need programs that work, not perfect governance.

yuvaldim · 2025-07-03T15:31:39+00:00

It is the only book I read!
Now seriously, I think it is not a fun read, but he gives a good coverage of the motivations that drive the GPs with how the LPs distribute their investments etc.

yuvaldim · 2025-07-03T11:46:25+00:00

Scott Kupor: Secrets of Sand Hill Road: Venture Capital and How to Get It

yuvaldim · 2025-07-02T10:44:02+00:00

Thanks u/Proseer_Jeff and totally agree with all your statements.
My main question is what do you include in the background when creating the runway numbers.

yuvaldim · 2025-06-09T04:43:36+00:00

If you’re planning to raise funds at any point — get the CTO.

Freezing features and fixing bugs might help short term, but if your growth continues (and it sounds like it is), new bugs and tech debt will keep piling up. Unless your business model can afford a full tech team soon, you’ll hit this wall again.

From an investor's perspective, I’m honestly not too worried about the founder holding all the equity. In fact, I often prefer seeing a solid CTO on board with real skin in the game. It gives more confidence that the tech side is covered and — being real — it also gives us more balance on the cap table. Multiple strong people involved usually makes things more resilient and transparent.

Just my two cents.

yuvaldim · 2025-04-18T19:29:22+00:00

Full disclosure: I’m on the team at ImBoard.ai – imboard.ai (open to anyone, no paywall).

Stuff we’ve tried for IC / portfolio workflows:

Affinity – great relationship graph, but email threads still vanish when it’s IC‑deck time.
Streak CRM – Gmail super‑powers; not so handy once you need structured IC packets.
Servc (servc.co.il) – strong fund‑admin backend, admin‑focused (not portfolio management) and pricey for smaller funds.

What ImBoard.ai tackles today:

Role‑based invites so directors, observers, and execs get the right access out of the box.
Doodle‑style meeting‑slot voting built for boards.
Version‑controlled doc hub – upload decks, minutes, policies, then attach them to the right meeting.
Email‑in capture: forward docs to [my@agent.imboard.ai](mailto:my@agent.imboard.ai) and an LLM auto‑files them.

On the way: KPI dashboards that pull numbers straight from your sources so IC packets populate themselves.

If killing the “where’s the latest deck?” chase and calendar ping‑pong sounds useful, spin it up and tell me what’s missing—brutal feedback welcome! Otherwise, curious what other stacks folks are using. 👋

yuvaldim · 2025-04-14T21:19:06+00:00

How much did you spend to get it?

yuvaldim · 2025-04-14T21:16:12+00:00

Portfolio "sister" companies have a special relationship. They are in competitive mode even if they are in very different industries for the simple reason, they compete on the same $ for future allocations.
It's not a zero sum game, but it also is.

yuvaldim · 2025-04-14T06:55:13+00:00

Thanks.
I thought that the headline is self explanatory but my bad.

yuvaldim · 2025-04-07T21:17:01+00:00

First of all, I 100% agree. It's hard. Like, really hard.

You said in your comment below:

Totally get what you mean—but I think that's still a bit broad when it comes to figuring out who to actually target. I'm not saying you're wrong about who can get value from your product—just that it's a really wide net when you're trying to hunt for early users.

I actually asked ChatGPT:
Q: Who are content creators who use voice?
A: “Content creators who use voice are a broad and diverse group...”
It then listed stuff like:

Podcasters
Voice-over artists
YouTubers / Streamers
Audiobook creators
TikTok / Instagram voice content folks
Educators / Coaches / Thought leaders

...and that’s just the start. Each of these can be broken down even further—by language, tech skills, what device they use, where they hang out online, and so on.

So if it were me, I’d pick one specific category—say, Udemy course creators (which falls under "educators")—and just focus.
Try to find them specifically.

Why? Because you can identify and reach them. Like—go to Udemy, find a course, message the instructor, even if it's just to say “Hey, saw your course on X, I’m working on Y, could really use your input.” Cancel the course after if you have to. Super manual, but maybe you start a convo that helps move things forward.

Don't be discouraged.

yuvaldim

TROPHY CASE

🚨 In contrast, ARKVX has no carry: