The Only Two Things That Matter in VC Content

It's easy to look at the VC content landscape and see a sea of sameness. There's nothing new under the sun.

It's especially true when, as Will Manidis noted, there are 100s of new podcasts, newsletters, and shows launched by venture platforms every quarter (and his bet is that 99% will be value destructive).

He's not wrong.

The problem isn't that funds are making content. It's that most funds have nothing worth saying.

But the solution is simpler than you think.

Having worked with 15+ funds this year on content, I always come back to that question, Do you have anything worth saying?

To answer that, you need one of two things -

1. Unique data

2. Unique perspective

If you have neither - all the production value in the world won't fix generic insights.

It's easy to get caught in the trap of spending time on what doesn't matter. Obsessing over production quality, posting frequency, platform choice. But the Pareto principle is the truest thing about VC content: 20% of what you do drives 80% of the results.

Think of any exceptional venture content you've seen. The impact came from the insight or the data.

We covered this in our GP Content Fit Matrix - matching format to each partner's natural strengths matters, after you've established you have something worth saying.

But here's the thing… *most* funds actually have both. They just don't recognise it as content.

What is Unique Data?

Unique data doesn't mean you need a data science team or proprietary APIs. It means you see patterns others don't because of your specific position.

The Sawdust Approach

Think of sawdust as the off shoots from the work you're already doing every day.

For example, Nichole Wischoff (Wischoff Ventures) often shares their deal flow funnel - how many companies they screen, get to first meeting, second meeting, partner meeting, term sheet etc. This data already exists in their CRM. Sharing it gives founders realistic expectations about VC process and positions her fund as transparent.

Multiple variants of this can come from a simple portfolio analysis:

• Where are your portfolio companies geographically concentrated?

• How many run remote vs. hybrid vs. in-office teams?

• Revenue milestones at each funding stage?

You likely have this data internally. It just needs to be synthesised and shared.

The Survey Approach

Konvoy Ventures surveyed their gaming portfolio with a simple questionnaire and published a game developer survey report. 1-3 questions max, sent once, creates an annual content asset that compounds.

Keep it short so founders actually respond, and you have a density of data.

• "What's your biggest operational challenge right now?" (reveals patterns)

• "How many candidates did you interview for your last engineering hire?" (hiring benchmarks)

• "What percentage of revenue comes from your top 3 customers?" (concentration metrics)

The External Partner Approach

I’m sure last week you have seen this chart circulating:

Mercury partnered with a16z to survey Mercury customers about company spending patterns. Both parties benefit - Mercury showcases their data capabilities and customer base, a16z provides the venture context that makes the numbers shareable.

Who has access to your portfolio that you could partner with?

• Banking partners

• HR/ payroll platforms

• Legal/ Accounting firms

They have data. You have distribution and context. Partner to create something neither could make alone.

The Proprietary Approach

Some funds create unique data by building their own analytical infrastructure. For example:

Rebel Fund built an ML algorithm predicting YC company trends. They publish the data and methodology, which is inherently unique to them.

You don't need to build algorithms, or share anything confidential. But what can you publish about a specific way you are analysing companies or even using data/tools (like this).

• Survival analysis of companies by founding team composition

• Correlation between early metrics and Series A success

• Geographic patterns in founder networks

What is Unique Perspective?

Unique perspective combines specific views, or your lived experiences. Both shape your behaviour and helps founders understand how you actually think.

Where Unique Perspective Comes From:

What does your firm believe that others don't?

This is the Peter Thiel thing that helps you avoid vapid marketing claims - and express conviction about something that's not consensus.

• "AI companies without proprietary data will all be commoditised - we only back those with data moats"

• "Pre-revenue valuations are a mistake - we wait until founders prove they can charge money, even if we pay more"

• "The best B2B founders are non-technical”

Idk… I made these up… but your perspective needs to have implications for behaviour. If it doesn't change how you invest, it's not a perspective - it's a tagline.

Leveraging Unique Partners' Backgrounds:

If your partner was an operator, those lessons are unique perspective:

• "Scaling from 10 to 100 people - how we did it"

• "Every company I advised made this same pricing mistake"

Lived experience that informs how you advise portfolio companies. Seems a huge miss to me how many funds run by real experts lock these away.

Leveraging Relationships:

Your network also shapes your perspective:

• Portfolio founders writing about their specific challenges.

• Advisors contributing frameworks they actually use, or where they see trends.

This works when you're adding your investment lens as context, not just republishing someone else's thoughts.

How to Extract This From Your Firm:

This is where most funds get stuck. They know they have this somewhere, but can't systematically surface it.

At Refinery, we've built systems for funds to consistently extract this - it's literally why we're called Refinery: extracting usable products out of crude oil. Being external helps -we see things from first principles that internal teams miss because they're too close to it. And working across many funds means we spot patterns about what works.

For unique data:

1. Audit what you already track

   CRM metrics (deal flow, conversion rates), Portfolio dashboards (growth rates, hiring patterns), Investment memos (decision criteria, scoring).
   

2. Pick the simplest data point to share
   Start with one interesting metric - share it as a post, if it’s interesting create a blog, if it’s still interesting create a report.

3. Make it repeatable
   Can you update this quarterly or annually? One-off data is interesting. Repeated data becomes a benchmark, and content can build of it’s previous iteration.

For unique perspective:

1. Interview your team

• What do you believe that most VCs don't?

• What have you learned from operating/previous roles?

• What patterns do you see that others miss?

This sounds incredibly obvious, but is hugely overlooked. Successful partners have interesting stories. Trivial example, but from all of a16z’s content, their most viewed piece is Marc Andreessen explaining why he made hyperlinks blue - perhaps personal history is often more compelling than investment theses?

2. Mine your investment memos Your internal debate about why you invested (or passed) often contains your unique perspective. Can you share sanitised versions?

3. Document portfolio learnings After board meetings or founder conversations, capture patterns… Three of our companies tried X this quarter… Common mistake we're seeing in our portfolio right now etc.

The Niche Multiplier

Generic perspective becomes unique when specificity is applied.

You can participate in broader conversations - macro trends, viral topics, industry debates - without adding to the noise. Take the general discussion and apply it to your specific niche or geography.

• "Founder-market fit matters" → generic

• "Founder-market fit matters more than TAM for vertical SaaS in healthcare because [specific evidence]" → unique
  

• "Remote work debate" → generic

• "What we're seeing: how Midwest startups are using remote work to compete for SF talent" → unique

This is why thesis-driven, or geographic focused funds easier content strategies. Their niche creates natural specificity.

Start here: Are You Unique?

If you have neither unique data or perspective, don't make content yet. Use those resources to develop one or both:

• Start tracking portfolio patterns.

• Survey your founders.

• Document your partners' operating lessons.

• Develop actual theses with implications.

If you have one, lean into it completely.

If you have both, you're in the rare position where content actually builds moats. Invest systematically. This lets you skip 'should we start a podcast?' and ask the better question: 'What do we know that no one else is seeing?'

If the honest answer is nothing… that's not a content problem. That's a strategy problem.

Quick application… Why This Newsletter Works…

Topic: Marketing and content (generic, 10,000s of newsletters)

Unique Perspective: Specifically for venture (niche in a niche, in marketing and in vc)
Unique Data: Worked with a breadth of funds, see patterns individual platform people don't

Not perfect - I'm not running massive studies - but enough differentiation to find an audience - thanks for reading!

Laurie, Refinery Media

If you made it all the way through, thanks so much for reading! Several hundred VCs now open this every week. If it’s helped you think differently about marketing, Venture, or storytelling, please send it to someone in your orbit.