The new math: why seed investors are selling their winners earlier
Charles Hudson had just closed his fifth fund several months ago – $66 million for Precursor Ventures – when one of his limited partners asked him to run an exercise. What would have happened, the LP wondered, if Hudson had sold all his portfolio companies at Series A? What about Series B? Or Series C?
The question wasn't academic. After two decades in venture capital, Hudson has been watching the math of seed investing change, maybe permanently. LPs who've previously been patient with seven-to-eight-year hold periods are suddenly asking questions about interim liquidity.
'Seven or eight years feels like a really long time' to LPs right now, says Hudson, even though 'it's always been seven or eight years.'
The reason: a steady stream of venture returns in recent years — returns that made long hold periods acceptable — has largely dried up. Coupled with the availability of other, more liquid investment options, many backers of very early-stage VC are demanding a new approach.
The analysis his LP requested revealed an uncomfortable truth, says Hudson. Selling everything at the Series A stage didn't work; the compounding effect of staying in the best companies outweighed any benefits from cutting losses early. But Series B was different.
'You could have a north of 3x fund if you sold everything at the B,' Hudson discovered. 'And I'm like, 'Well, that's pretty good.''
Beyond pretty good, that realization is reshaping how Hudson thinks about portfolio management in 2025. Though now a veteran investor – Hudson has spent 22 years in VC between Precursor, an eight-year run at Uncork Capital and another four years at In-Q-Tel earlier in his career – he says investors in very young companies are being forced to think like private equity managers, optimizing for cash returns alongside the home runs that, if they're lucky, define their careers.
It's not an easy mental change to make. 'The companies where there's the most secondary interest are also the set of companies where I have the greatest expectations for the future,' says Hudson.
It's not just Hudson; his thinking about secondary sales reflects broader pressures reshaping the venture ecosystem. Hans Swildens is the founder of Industry Ventures, a San Francisco-based fund of funds and direct investment firm with stakes in 700 venture firms, and he told Techrunch in April that venture funds are 'starting to get savvier about what they need to do to generate liquidity.'
In fact, Swildens is seeing venture funds hire full-time staff members specifically to pursue alternative liquidity options, with some seed managers dedicating months to 'manufacturing liquidity from their funds.'
Though this reshuffling of priorities extends far beyond any single fund, the pressure is particularly acute for smaller funds like Precursor, a traditional seed-stage fund that prides itself on backing unconventional founders like Laura Modi of ByHeart baby formula (a solo founder in a regulated industry with no prior experience) and Doktor Gerson of Rad AI (whose previous startup had failed). While firms with mega-funds like Sequoia and General Catalyst can afford to wait for $25 billion outcomes, smaller funds need to be more tactical about when and how they harvest returns.
Perhaps nowhere is the shift more visible than in Hudson's relationships with limited partners. University endowments, once the most coveted LPs in venture, are now grappling with unforeseen challenges from the Trump administration.
Harvard, of course, is the poster child here, with federal investigations into its admissions practices, threats to research funding tied to compliance issues, and ongoing scrutiny of its substantial endowment amid calls for universities to increase their annual spending requirements or face taxation.
Hudson says that based on his conversations with LPs inside these organizations, they've never believed more in the power of venture, yet they've also never felt more hesitant about making 10- to 15-year illiquid commitments.
The result is a more complex LP base with competing needs. Some want 'as much money back as soon as possible, even if that's a suboptimal outcome in the long term,' says Hudson. Others prefer that Hudson 'hold everything to maturity, because that's what's going to maximize my returns.'
Navigating these demands requires the kind of portfolio management sophistication that seed investors haven't traditionally needed, which Hudson views with some ambivalence. Venture, he says, is starting to feel a lot less like an art and something that 'feels a lot more like some of these other sub-asset classes in finance.'
Hudson isn't without hope, he adds, but he is clear-eyed about what's changing on the ground, as well as the opportunities those changes create.
As funds grow larger and deploy more capital, they're becoming necessarily more algorithmic, looking for 'companies in these categories, with founders from these schools with these academic backgrounds who worked at these companies,' he says.
The approach works for deploying large amounts of capital efficiently, but it misses the 'weird and wonderful' companies that have defined Hudson's best returns and kept Precursor in the game.
'If you're going to hire people just off a resume screener tool,' he says, 'you're going to miss people who maybe have really relevant experiences that the algorithm doesn't catch.'
You can hear our full interview with Hudson via TechCrunch's StrictlyVC Download podcast. New episodes come out every Tuesday.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Adobe brings AI-image generation app to phones, adds partners
(Corrects paragraphs 2-4 to reflect that new partner models are not yet available on the Firefly mobile app) By Stephen Nellis SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) -Adobe Inc. released its first dedicated artificial intelligence smartphone app on Tuesday that includes AI models from the company and partner firms, in a bid to tap into a growing trend of sharing AI images and videos over social media. The new Firefly mobile app packages Adobe's own AI model together with models from OpenAI and Google and is available on iOS and Android phones. In addition, Adobe is integrating models from new partner firms Ideogram, Luma AI, Pika and Runway, which can be accessed in Firefly Boards, a product that is part of the Firefly web app. Generating images that can easily be shared on social media has become a key driver of AI interest, with OpenAI's Ghibli-style AI images driving record traffic to the ChatGPT creator. Adobe's mobile service will offer subscribers unlimited basic image generation from Adobe models, while it will charge extra for access to the company's premium models and those from its partners. The subscription cost will be the same as for the web versions of Firefly, which start at $10 per month. The San Jose, California-based company had earlier released AI tools along with the mobile app version of its popular image-editing program Photoshop. Adobe has not disclosed how much it pays the partner models on the Firefly app. The company had promised users that its AI model is trained only on material that it has a legal right to use, with Adobe offering protection against copyright claims. Ely Greenfield, Adobe's chief technology officer for digital media, said Adobe's approach has also gained some resonance among consumers. "Even for many of our individual customers, that promise of the commercial safety and the story about how Firefly is trained continues to be a really important differentiator," Greenfield said. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Gizmodo
2 hours ago
- Gizmodo
Reddit Looks to Get in Bed With Altman's Creepy ‘World ID' Orbs for User Verification
Gaze into the Orb if you want your upvotes. According to a report from Semafor, Reddit is actively considering partnering with World ID, the verification system co-founded by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, to perform user verification on its platform. Per the report, Reddit's potential partnership with World ID would allow users to verify that they are human by staring into one of World ID's eye-scanning orbs. Once confirmed to be a real person, users would be able to continue using Reddit without revealing anything about their identity. Currently, Reddit only does verification via email, which has been insufficient to combat the litany of incoming AI-powered bots that are flooding the platform. Gizmodo reached out to both Reddit and World ID for details of the potential partnership. Reddit declined to comment. A spokesperson for World said, 'We don't have anything to share at this time; however, we do see value in proof of human being a key part of online experiences, including social, and welcome all of the opportunities possible to discuss this technology with potential partners.' For those unfamiliar, World is somewhere between a verification system and a crypto scheme. World ID is a method for verifying that a person is a human without requiring them to provide additional personal information—something the company calls 'anonymous proof of human.' It offers several verification techniques, but the most notable is its eye-scanning Orb. The company claims that neither 'verification data, nor iris photos or iris codes' are ever revealed, but going through the scan gets you a World ID, which can be used on a platform like Reddit, should it partner with World on this endeavor. Somewhere in the backend of this whole thing is a cryptocurrency called Worldcoin, which you theoretically can use at major retailers—but like, can you really? Is anyone doing that? The founders of World, Altman and Alex Bania, launched the crypto part of the program with the intention of building an 'AI-funded' universal basic income. Mostly, it's made local governments really mad and has been at the center of legal and regulatory investigations into how it's handling user data. It's largely targeted developing nations for its early launches, and used some dubious practices along the way to get people to demo the system. Also, it's probably not technically illegal, but it does seem pretty convenient that Sam Altman offers a 'solve' for a problem that his other company, OpenAI, is in no small part responsible for. Almost seems like he knew what issues he was about to cause and decided to cash in on both ends. Must be nice.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘I just want finality': GOP greets newest TikTok extension with resignation
President Donald Trump's latest move to keep TikTok alive is yet again frustrating congressional Republicans, many of whom object to China's continued involvement in the popular app but just want to be done with the whole drama. 'Not my favorite thing,' Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), along-time proponent of the ban, deadpanned, when asked about the president's plan to issue another extension. He spoke a day before the White House confirmed Trump signed a 90-day suspension of enforcement of the law requiring TikTok to divest from ByteDance, its China-based parent company, throwing another lifeline to the short-form video app. By Friday, some House lawmakers registered a note of resigned irritation. The extension — Trump's third since the law went into effect on Jan. 19 — is a unilateral decision not envisioned in the bipartisan law passed by Congress and upheld last year by the Supreme Court. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.), a member of the House Intelligence and China committees, told POLITICO. 'The national security concerns and vulnerabilities are still there, and they have not gone away. I would argue they've almost become more enhanced in many ways." But Trump's extension of the TikTok law largely boxed out Republicans in both chambers who have shown little inclination — beyond stern words — to prevent him from making these postponements almost routine. Many GOP lawmakers saw themselves as granting the president space to cut a promised deal while the White House deals with urgent priorities, like trade negotiations and the Israel-Iran conflict. 'In light of everything going on, I think he did the right thing,' Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a China hawk who voted for the ban, told POLITICO of Trump. 'I have concerns about all kinds of things — that [the extension] is on the list — but it's not at the top of the list.' Though Trump has promised his TikTok negotiations areclosely tied to trade talks with China, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent testified last week to a Senate panel that TikTok's sale wasnot currently a part of the negotiations with China, raising a further potential obstacle to Trump inking a deal in the near future. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close ally of the president and longtime national-security hawk said earlier in the week: 'The sooner we get that issue solved, the better,' without offering any ideas for further enforcement. 'I just want finality,' Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told POLITICO. 'I want some certainty and just know that the Congress isn't being played when we make a decision [that the app] be sold.' Another member of the House China Committee, Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa), told POLITICO, 'No more extensions. It's time to follow through.' Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), also a member of the China panel, noted in a post on X Thursday the law only allows one extension of the compliance deadline, adding, 'I was proud to support the ban of TikTok and believe the law should be implemented as written.' With their comments, the lawmakers echoed House China Chair John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), who in early June called for the U.S. to 'let [TikTok] go dark' to bring China to the table to negotiate. He reiterated that stance on Friday. 'Delays only embolden the Chinese Communist Party,' Moolenaar said in a statement to POLITICO. 'I urge the administration to enforce the law as written and protect the American people from this growing national security threat." Still, observers say Republicans are not exercising their leverage to demand the White House enforce the law they helped write, for example by withholding funding or congressional oversight hearings. "I keep reading that Republicans are 'frustrated' and 'impatient' about their TikTok law being ignored, but they should stop complaining to reporters and take it up with Trump,' said Adam Kovacevich, founder and CEO of the pro-tech Chamber of Progress. Among the Republicans being undercut by the president is his own secretary of state. Marco Rubio — who as senator was one of the loudest critics of TikTok's ties to China, and a huge backer of the app's ban — has been conspicuously silent as Trump has repeatedly granted more time to strike a deal for its sale. 'You have to decide what's more important, our national security and the threat that it poses to our national security,' Rubio told POLITICO in March 2023, as Congress was considering a ban. 'You have to weigh that against what you might think the electoral consequences of it are. For me, it's an easy balancing act. I mean, there is no balance. I'm always going to be for our national security.' A spokesperson for Rubio at the State Department did not respond to a request for comment. Democrats — even those who support keeping TikTok online — say Trump's approach is the wrong one. 'These endless extensions are not only illegal, but they also put TikTok's fate in the hands of risk-averse corporate shareholders,' Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) told POLITICO in a statement. 'This is deeply unfair to TikTok's creators and users. I'm prepared to work towards a solution, but Trump isn't coming to the table.'
