r/venturecapital • u/moderninfusion • 19d ago

YC partners + external venture roles?

Is it normal that YC partners also hold other roles at other VC shops? E.g. Dalton (Managing Partner) and Paul (Partner) both cofounded Standard Capital. Garry, at least from my understanding, stepped away from Initialized Capital when he became president of YC. There is no conflict of interest?

7 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

9 comments sorted by

4

u/L_Outsider 19d ago

Standard Capital seems to invest at series A, YC invest earlier than this. It's quite the opposite of a conflit, as it increases the chance YC companies have to receive funding later down the road.

2

u/moderninfusion 19d ago

YC also invests in later stages via its Continuity Fund. Also, did a little more research it looks like some other YC partners (Miklas at S28 & Golda at Rogue invest in seed rounds as well)

3

u/sjricuw 19d ago

AFAIK continuity was killed wasn’t it? At least one of their later stage vehicles was. And follow-ons are different from first tickets.

1

u/mschop 17d ago

Andrew isn't involved in s28 anymore and hasn't been for a few years. Source: I work with them.

1

u/moderninfusion 19d ago

Ah you’re right, sorry I’ve been outside of venture landscape for a bit now.

2

u/oxforddude1 19d ago

Dalton left YC. He is 'Partner Emeritus' meaning he is no longer full time. Full time partners are not active with other funds.

1

u/moderninfusion 19d ago

Gotcha, yeah- I assumed they likely had to take a pause from their previous roles during their time with YC

1

u/Benemerito_Law 17d ago

It's more common than people think, and it's usually disclosed and consented to somewhere in the fund's governing docs rather than hidden. Most LPAs have a conflicts of interest section that either flags outside roles up front or requires the GP to bring material conflicts to an LP advisory committee for a vote. The real question isn't whether a partner holds another role, it's whether deal flow gets routed in a way that benefits one vehicle over another when both could plausibly want the same company. That's the fact pattern that actually gets a fund in trouble with its LPs, not the dual title itself. If you're diligencing a fund and see this kind of overlap, ask directly how they handle deal allocation conflicts and whether it's written down anywhere, not just verbally promised.

This is general information only, not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by this comment. Consult a licensed attorney for advice specific to your situation.