The Twenty Minute VCLogan Bartlett: WTF is Happening at Growth Stage Investing? | 20VC #920
CHAPTERS
- 1:06 – 2:39
Logan Bartlett’s path into venture and joining Redpoint
Logan recounts finding venture “accidentally” after starting in investment banking and software advisory. He explains how early exposure to firms like Battery and Redpoint led to joining Battery first, then later coming to Redpoint as a partner.
- •Started in investment banking; learned software/tech investing through advisory work
- •Interviewed with multiple firms; Battery offered, Redpoint initially passed
- •Six years at Battery shaped his investing foundation
- •Joined Redpoint around the start of 2020 after Redpoint re-recruited him
- 2:39 – 4:16
What Battery taught him: investing discipline across strategies
Logan shares the core lessons he took from Battery’s multi-strategy platform. He emphasizes prudence, repeatable returns, and learning to evaluate opportunities across venture, growth, and buyout styles.
- •Battery’s culture of consistent LP returns and prudence
- •Exposure to early, late, growth equity, and buyout approaches
- •Learning that there are many valid “styles” to make money
- •Generalized framework for evaluating investments regardless of stage
- 4:16 – 6:29
Is now actually a great time to invest? Opportunity set + price reset
The conversation turns to whether the current moment is truly attractive for deploying capital. Logan argues it’s among the best he’s seen due to a partial price recalibration and founders valuing more than just capital.
- •Compares today to 2014–2016 as another strong investing window
- •Recalibration in expectations: founders seek help, not just money
- •Bullish on major tech trends (software, fintech, healthcare, digital transformation)
- •Notes consumer “green shoots” returning (e.g., BeReal)
- 6:29 – 8:53
Where prices are (and aren’t) recalibrating across stages
Harry challenges whether pricing has really changed, especially at seed. Logan explains the “funnel” effect from public markets to late-stage private, the Series B–D slowdown, and why early stages can still inflate.
- •Public market repricing flows unevenly into private markets
- •Late-stage deals show more structure (converts, discounts, terms) than pure repricing
- •Series B/C/D seeing fewer deals because last-round valuations are too high
- •Capital migrating earlier squeezes seed/pre-seed and can inflate valuations
- 8:53 – 11:50
Should founders raise right now? The Series B fundraising trap
Logan outlines why Series B is uniquely awkward: fewer comps, more investor inconsistency, and more wasted cycles. He suggests raising if needed, but if possible waiting until the market’s “valuation zone” becomes more coherent.
- •Seed/A mostly “game on”; Series B is the most dislocated segment
- •Founders can get jerked around by investors claiming to be active
- •If you need capital, raise—runway is a prerequisite for success
- •If you can wait, post-Labor Day/fall may be more efficient for pricing + process
- 11:50 – 13:45
Doubling down vs. catching a falling knife: concentration strategy
Harry asks how aggressive investors should be in concentrating into existing winners amid uncertainty. Logan frames it as stage-dependent: later-stage must anchor to public comps, while earlier-stage can justify proactive doubling down if fundamentals are strong.
- •Later-stage investing constrained by eventual public-market liquidity pricing
- •Dislocation example: private rounds at huge ARR multiples vs much lower public comps
- •Earlier-stage: if a company is working and valuation is low enough, doubling down can be smart
- •Consider fund construction: blended cost, ownership, and concentration limits
- 13:45 – 15:44
Why “spray and pray then concentrate” often fails—and how top firms do it
They debate whether funds can realistically build ownership in their best companies. Logan argues it works only when investors treat early checks like real commitments, not cheap call options—and when they truly earn founder trust.
- •Some firms execute the model well (e.g., Sequoia, Founders Fund)
- •Winners don’t treat early checks as out-of-the-money options
- •High-touch support builds credibility to invest more later
- •“Sharp elbows” to box out others can backfire with founders in future rounds
- •Time is the binding constraint if you treat every small check like a big one
- 15:44 – 18:09
“VCs have gotten lazy”: power shifts, competition, and the new hustle
Logan explains how years of founder scarcity gave investors disproportionate leverage, and how the last two years flipped power to entrepreneurs. He also notes why some well-known investors retired rather than adapt to a more competitive, hustle-driven market.
- •Venture became more institutionalized recently; more competition and new entrants
- •Some investors mistook market tailwinds for skill (fooled by randomness)
- •Healthy ecosystems require tension—both sides must “earn” the deal
- •Recent years shifted leverage toward founders; now moving back toward equilibrium
- •Older-era investors often didn’t want to chase founders for allocation
- 18:09 – 21:14
Where Redpoint is challenged: hyper-personalized venture and positioning
Harry asks what competitive threats multi-stage firms feel today. Logan describes a world moving from “broadcast” to “hyper-personalized” venture, where founders can pick specialized firms for almost any preference—forcing Redpoint to win through clear individual value plus a coherent firm brand.
- •Analogy: broadcast TV → cable → streaming/TikTok personalization
- •Specialists exist for every founder preference (domain, hands-on, hands-off, capital)
- •Each partner must stand for something to cut through the noise
- •Firm brand must mean something beyond any individual partner
- •Goal: win a fair share of best deals despite specialists and mega-brands
- 21:14 – 23:39
Branding debate: partner-led stars vs. unified firm identity
Harry pushes back on whether a firm can simultaneously amplify individual partner brands and a single cohesive firm brand. Logan concedes tension exists, but argues both “before and after the @” (individual and firm) should accumulate value over time.
- •Trade-off between star-partner brands and firm-first brand strategies
- •Practical signal: where content lives (personal Substack/domain vs firm site)
- •Andreessen cited as a firm that elevated individuals while building a mega-brand
- •Logan’s heuristic: the value of the name before and after the email @
- •Aim: compounding reputational equity for both partner and platform
- 23:39 – 29:45
Marking down books, transparency, and the 2021 price-sensitivity hangover
They discuss why many funds haven’t marked down portfolios despite public-market declines. Logan argues stage matters and valuation is illiquid, but pretending nothing changed erodes LP trust; disciplined, transparent marking policies matter most. He also reflects on how 2021 forced underwriting adjustments even if the return framework stayed consistent.
- •Early-stage marks can be hard to justify down (or even justify up) based on company progress
- •Late-stage marks held at last-round can be “superficial” versus public comps
- •LP incentives differ: some want stable marks (fund-of-funds), others need denominator relief
- •Key is a consistent, explained methodology—not arbitrary across-the-board cuts
- •Redpoint’s growth underwriting: 3–5x target with 10x+ upside; 2021 altered price sensitivity via public comps
- 29:45 – 34:19
Outcome scenario planning vs. winner underestimation + ownership philosophy
Harry challenges scenario planning because it can underweight extreme winners. Logan acknowledges false precision risk, but uses probability-weighted thinking to make the best decisions under uncertainty, sharing Braze as a case where the actual outcome far exceeded expectations. He also clarifies Redpoint’s focus on dollar multiples more than strict ownership targets at growth.
- •Scenario planning can mislead, but helps structure probabilistic decision-making
- •Concept of “resulting” and separating decision quality from outcome (Annie Duke)
- •Braze example: haggling over entry price mattered far less than being in the deal
- •Lesson: if you want the company “within the margin,” don’t over-optimize small price deltas
- •Ownership: Redpoint growth focuses on multiple-on-dollars; early-stage team cares more about % ownership
- 34:19 – 42:13
Biggest miss, founder faith, and the real job of a board member
Logan names passing on Snowflake at Battery as a major miss, driven by near-term customer feedback and fear of competing with AWS—rather than “downfield” inevitability thinking. He then addresses losing faith in founders and the ethics of CEO replacement, emphasizing trust-building, soft diplomacy, and avoiding boardroom power plays unless necessary.
- •Missed Snowflake due to over-focusing on current signals vs long-term inevitability
- •Lesson: if a shift seems inevitable and the team is right, don’t wait for perfection
- •Has lost faith when execution missed a window; rarely due to misreading on entry
- •Prefers not to “oust” founders; aims for pragmatic alignment and diplomacy
- •Board role as trusted confidant; voting to remove CEO suggests relationship breakdown
- 42:13 – 59:48
Board load, what makes a great board, and rapid-fire takes (crypto, PR, funds)
Logan discusses how many boards is sustainable and calls out a favorite board experience and standout board members. The episode closes with rapid-fire opinions on books, crypto’s likely shakeout, why B2B marketing underperforms, why early PR outsourcing fails, crossover funds (best and most at risk), and his recent investment AcuityMD.
- •On five boards; thinks 8–10 is a realistic upper bound given other responsibilities
- •Enjoys Crossbeam board dynamics; highlights qualities of great board members (e.g., empathy + backbone)
- •Favorite book: Team of Rivals; leadership through conflicting viewpoints
- •Crypto: some real use cases, but venture dollars likely far exceeded true utility; expects many zeros
- •PR and marketing: early founders should build relationships and messaging in-house; avoid PR agency black-boxing
- •Crossover commentary: admires Coatue; warns newer/scaled-too-fast entrants may face reckoning; expects potential moves to family-office model
- •Recent investment: AcuityMD—vertical CRM/targeting for medical devices; strong insight + disciplined founders
