CHAPTERS
- 0:00 – 0:23
No valuation negotiation: founders name the price and Standard accepts or passes
Dalton and Michael open by emphasizing a core principle of Standard Capital: they do not negotiate valuation. Founders state their valuation in the application, and Standard either accepts the deal as-written or declines.
- •Standard doesn’t negotiate valuation with founders
- •Accepted companies received exactly the valuation they put in the application
- •The approach removes a common pain point in Series A fundraising
- •The policy is consistent across all funded companies
- 0:23 – 1:20
Why Standard Capital exists: bring YC-style simplicity to the Series A
They recap the motivation behind Standard: take what worked at Y Combinator and apply it to the next major funding step. The goal is to make raising a Series A feel more like an application/interview process than a drawn-out sales cycle.
- •Standard is designed for Series A rounds
- •Built from Dalton and Michael’s experience funding and helping companies raise As
- •Traditional Series A fundraising is a very different skill than getting into YC
- •Standard aims to standardize and simplify that process
- 1:20 – 1:37
First cycle results: nine companies funded (with limited public announcement so far)
Dalton shares the early outcomes: Standard has funded nine companies to date, though only a couple are publicly listed at the time of recording. The conversation frames this as an initial “cycle one” that generated new learnings.
- •Nine companies funded so far
- •Only two were publicly announced at recording time
- •They treat this as one completed cycle with more to come
- •Michael frames the discussion as learning from running the process end-to-end
- 1:37 – 3:28
Unexpected demand: strong word-of-mouth drove far more applications than expected
Dalton explains the biggest surprise: unlike his expectations about slow awareness-building, Standard quickly became widely known among founders. The result was a flood of applications and more interviews than planned, disrupting schedules in a “good” way.
- •They expected modest awareness but got broad visibility quickly
- •Application volume was much higher than anticipated
- •Reviewing applications required ~3x more time than Dalton planned
- •Founder excitement and referrals created strong word-of-mouth momentum
- 3:28 – 4:29
The end-to-end timeline: a two-week decision process with two meetings
They detail the operating cadence from deadline to decision. Standard moves quickly: interview invites go out within about a week, second meetings are in-person, and final decisions follow within two days—compressing what is often months of fundraising into ~two weeks.
- •First-round interview invites within ~5–7 days of the deadline
- •Two-step evaluation: initial interview then in-person meeting
- •Final decision made about two days after the in-person meeting
- •Overall process length: roughly two weeks
- 4:29 – 5:07
Founder time cost: ~4 hours for a yes/no, plus lightweight diligence
Michael highlights how unusually time-efficient the process is for founders. Dalton estimates the application takes a couple of hours, interviews are short, and diligence requests should be easy for well-run companies to fulfill—shifting most of the work onto Standard rather than founders.
- •Application effort estimated at a couple hours (often ~2–3)
- •First interview ~20 minutes; second meeting ~30 minutes
- •Total active founder time roughly ~4 hours for a decision
- •Standard still does diligence, but founders mainly share existing docs
- 5:07 – 6:25
How to apply well: treat the application as a PMF and scale-thinking exercise
Dalton notes that Standard’s application goes deeper than YC’s in certain areas, especially around product/market fit and how the company can become very large. He recommends founders complete it even if just as a strategic planning exercise.
- •Questions focus more on product/market fit and scaling than early-stage YC prompts
- •Answering “how this gets really big” is central
- •The application can be valuable even beyond fundraising
- •Strong answers demonstrate clarity on growth drivers and market potential
- 6:25 – 7:07
Advice for cycle two: apply early, apply multiple times, and reuse your prior application
They encourage founders to apply even if unsure or early, because there’s no penalty and repeat applications are explicitly supported. Having multiple data points over time makes it easier to evaluate momentum and progress.
- •Standard is set up to reward repeat applicants
- •Reapply by reusing most of the prior application and updating changes
- •They encourage applying earlier—even if you’re not fully sure
- •Multiple snapshots over time make improvement and traction easier to judge
- 7:07 – 9:29
Founder-set valuation: what worked, what didn’t, and why Standard won’t counter
Dalton explains the most novel part of the model: founders set their own valuation. Some matched valuation to traction well and were accepted; others chose prices that didn’t fit their progress and were rejected—often because they assumed negotiation would follow.
- •Founders set their own valuation in the application
- •Applicants who aligned valuation with traction tended to succeed
- •Some founders harmed themselves by choosing unrealistic valuations
- •Standard does not counteroffer; misunderstanding this led to rejections
- 9:29 – 10:35
How to think about valuation: higher price means a much higher bar
They propose a simple linear mental model: if you choose a much higher post-money valuation, the acceptance bar rises proportionally. Standard will prioritize time on companies whose traction and growth justify the price, rather than negotiating down.
- •Acceptance likelihood decreases as valuation increases unless traction justifies it
- •Example framing: a 120 post requires roughly double the excitement of a 60 post
- •Standard prefers to fund very fast-growing companies even at higher prices
- •The key is matching price to demonstrated momentum and market strength
- 10:35 – 11:25
Standard as an opt-out from traditional fundraising: no deck, no VC tour required
They contrast Standard with the conventional Series A process, positioning it as a deliberate alternative rather than a variation. The best-fit founders used it to skip pitching, deck-building, and investor backchanneling—applying directly as their primary plan.
- •Standard is intentionally “not normal” compared to typical fundraising
- •It’s an opt-out path from pitching and running a competitive process
- •Successful applicants often hadn’t talked to other investors or built a deck
- •The model prioritizes speed, clarity, and reduced founder time burden
- 11:25 – 12:39
Critique of traditional VC assumptions: ‘we already know all the good companies’
Michael recounts common VC criticisms, and Dalton pushes back strongly on the idea that top firms already know every great startup. They argue that believing this implies a stagnant, zero-margin market and reflects unhealthy disillusionment with the work of investing.
- •Some VCs claim pitching is a crucial founder skill; they question its importance
- •Some VCs claim they already know/scout all the good companies
- •Dalton argues that belief implies a zero-sum, no-margin investing landscape
- •They frame it as a sign of disillusionment and a reason to leave the industry
- 12:39 – 13:55
Next application window: early January deadline, late applications accepted
They close with logistics for the next cycle. Applications open in late December with an early January deadline, and late submissions are still reviewed—though applying around the deadline helps Standard process interviews efficiently in batches.
- •Next deadline is in early January
- •Applications open in late December
- •Late applications are allowed and still reviewed
- •Batch timing helps Standard move faster by cranking through interviews efficiently
