Given its reputation for opinion sharing, I guess it shouldn’t come as a surprise that there is a site out there that allows entrepreneurs to “rank” the VCs they’ve pitched on the new killer app they’ve created. That said, The Funded appears to be gaining traction rather slowly. The past tense name suggests that the portal is for folks that have already received money, but it appears that most of the commentary comes from the 99% of the pitch universe that get turned down by a firm (even if they receive capital from another player down the road).
I find it odd that someone feels the need to opine on the quality of a meeting they had with a prospective financier. If you think about it: an entrepreneur asks a VC for a meeting to pitch his/her new idea. The VC takes the meeting (time in their life that they can never get back once its been spent). The VC does some due diligence (or not), talks to the partners back at the ranch, replies (or doesn’t) to the request.
And then gets rated on their performance. If they give a bad no, or didn’t ask the right questions, they run the risk of being flamed on this site by the spurned founder.
Doesn’t really serve as an incentive to take meetings from folks that don’t come “well referred”, does it?
As for utility, if Sequoia gets some bad reviews, does that mean you shouldn’t try to get in the door with your own Google or Yahoo idea?
Now the Vault site, that does make some sense. If you are an i-banking Analyst at, say a bank-owned investment dealer in Toronto/Montreal/New York/San Fran and your VP asks you to come in a 7am on a Sunday monrning for a meeting on your tradiing comp, and then doesn’t show until 930am — one can understand why that guy (let’s call him Darryl) deserves a rating on Vault.
Just not sure what useful info anyone will ever get out of The Funded.