 |
|
|
|||||
Only about 10 percent of venture funds ever make it to a fourth vintage. Of those, just 5 to 10 percent are led by women. Im one of them. When I started Female Founders Fund in 2014, I believed that solid returns and conviction would speak for themselves. Strong performance would unlock capital and the industry would reward the achievement, especially from those breaking new groundor so I thought. What Ive come to learn is that venture capital isnt a pure meritocracy. Its a network-driven ecosystem where who you know often matters just as much as what you build. Cultural and political changes, and a tight market environment, are making it especially difficult for fund managers to maintain momentum. Now is the time for the industry to reflect on how to ensure that these funds, especially those led by diverse managers, can weather these forces and continue to support diverse founders with brilliant ideas. Investing in women isn’t charity. By yielding powerful, durable returns, it has proven to be smart business. As risk tolerance declines, it could be tempting for institutions to retreat to the familiar. Instead, they should pay attention to the data. A shorter runway for women Over the years, a few lessons have become clear. They arent the ones you find in your LPA, but theyre the realities that quietly shape who gets funded, who gets backed again, and who quietly fades away. Returns are just one part of the picture. While performance is important, other forcesinstitutional change, personal networks, and internal politicsoften drive how capital gets distributed. Once an institution commits to a fund, that relationship can extend across multiple vintages. The incentive to change managers is low. Check writers want proximity to the next generation of Tier 1 talent striking out on their own. That bias works in favor of spinoutsformer Sequoia, a16z, or Benchmark investors taking the entrepreneurial leap. But for managers without that institutional pedigree, the path looks very different. And for women, who remain significantly underrepresented in those firms partnership ranks, the path is even narrower.Your first fund is often cobbled together from founders, friends, and family offices willing to take an early bet. By Fund II or III, however, the bar shifts. Institutions want scale, systems, and years of realized returns, all of which take time to build. For emerging managers, thats the hardest leap: breaking through a system designed to reward familiarity over conviction. Venture is a relationship business. It prides itself on data and rigor, but in practice it runs on trust. The capital that fuels our industry still moves through networks built over decades. Who you know, how long youve known them, and what you have to offer, determines access. This is why new or diverse fund managers often find it easier to raise their first fund on promise than their second on proof. Convincing someone to take the initial bet on someone new can be easier than asking them to break a pattern with subsequent fundsbecause the pattern is still overwhelmingly male. We must also look at money. Wealth isnt optionalits the price of entry. For example, all new fund managers are expected to invest a GP commit, which equates to roughly 1 percent of their total fund size. On a $50 million fund, thats $500,000 in cash, upfront. Imagine asking an entrepreneur to invest half a million dollars in their own Series B to show commitment. For many, especially women and first-time fund managers, that barrier is insurmountable without preexisting, generational, or spousal wealth. It is one of the quietest but most enduring structural filters in venture, and it uniquely disadvantages women, who, on average, hold less personal and intergenerational wealth. Having a financial cushion is also vital to play the long game that venture requires. To stay in the business, particularly through downturns, you need a financial cushion. Big payouts dont happen often. Selling some of the investment early can help a little, but small fund managers cant always afford to take a lower price without making it harder to raise money later. Its not just about resilience and grit; its about runway. And because women more frequently enter the industry later, without the safety nets that have historically supported male peers, their runway is often meaningfully shorter. Staying in the game long enough to see your conviction validated is, in itself, a form of privilege. Another challenge that has played out over the years is that while several well-intentioned institutions and corporations have stepped in to support and capitalize diverse managers, the purpose behind many of these checks has been to provide start-up capital designed to help new funds get off the ground, with the expectation that larger institutional investors would take over from there. That handoff, however, has proven difficult. Even as the tide has turned culturally and politically, theres a real opportunity to rethink how we sustain diverse managers beyond the first fund, widening the base of long-term support so they can weather market cycles and build lasting franchises. The current system still assumes women will somehow graduate into institutional support structures that were never designed with them in mind. Shaping the next frontier I started Female Founders Fund as an entrepreneur who spotted alpha in the marketa clear gap between the caliber of women building companies and the capital available to back them. Twelve years later, that thesis has proven right again and again. At Female Founders Fund, weve seen it firsthand. Maven Clinic became the first unicorn in womens health, defining an entirely new category of care. Billie reimagined modern personal care before its acquisition by Edgewell. BentoBox transformed hospitality tech, leading to a successful exit. Tala, now valued at nearly $1 billion, continues to scale globally, expanding access to financial services in emerging markets. Wagmo created a new category of employee benefits around pet care, while Violette_FR built the first artist-led French beauty brand in decades. These companies touch millions of end customers and have built products, tools, and services that have scaled across industries proving that female-led innovation drives real enterprise and consumer value. These founders are category creatorspairing big visions with world-class execution. These outcomes arent outliers. Theyre evidence that backing female founders is a wise investment strategy that generates meaningful returns. We cannot let this moment in time with its tighter markets and shifting market and social priorities create negative momentum. Women are now leading in industries once thought impossible to break into: Space DOTS, founded by a NASA-trained astronautical engineer; Beyond Aero, reimagining flight through hydrogen-electric propulsion; Amini AI, building Africas environmental data backbone; Waabi, redefining autonomous trucking; and Dacora, making history as the first female-founded automotive company. From aerospace to AI, from climate to transportation, women are shaping the next frontier and the best is yet to come. In order to keep seeing new role models of success especially for those living outside the traditional Silicon Valley ecosystem, we need to keep capital flowing. Thats how the next generation of women and underrepresented founders will see themselves in the leaders building toay. In a moment when the world feels increasingly divided, doubling down on progress isnt just good businessits good stewardship. Because the hardest part isnt raising a fund, its building one that endures. And the longer I stay in this business, the clearer it becomes: investing in women isnt a risk, its a return.
Category:
E-Commerce
Russian authorities said Thursday they have imposed restrictions on Apple’s video calling service FaceTime, the latest step in an effort to tighten control over the internet and communications online. State internet regulator Roskomnadzor alleged in a statement that the service is being used to organize and conduct terrorist activities on the territory of the country, to recruit perpetrators (and) commit fraud and other crimes against our citizens. Apple did not respond to an emailed request for comment. The Russian regulator also announced that it has blocked Snapchat, a messaging app for sharing photos, videos and text messages, citing the same grounds it gave for restricting FaceTime. It said that it took the action Oct. 10, even though it only reported the move on Thursday. Under President Vladimir Putin, authorities have engaged in deliberate and multipronged efforts to rein in the internet. They have adopted restrictive laws and banned websites and platforms that don’t comply. Technology has also been perfected to monitor and manipulate online traffic. After Russias full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the government blocked major social media like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. Access to YouTube was disrupted last year in what experts called deliberate throttling of the widely popular site by the authorities. The Kremlin blamed YouTube owner Google for not properly maintaining its hardware in Russia. While its still possible to circumvent some of the restrictions by using virtual private network services, those are routinely blocked, too. Authorities further restricted internet access this summer with widespread shutdowns of cellphone internet connections. Officials have insisted the measure was needed to thwart Ukrainian drone attacks, but experts argued it was another step to tighten internet control. In dozens of regions, white lists of government-approved sites and services that are supposed to function despite a shutdown have been introduced. The government has also acted against popular messaging platforms. Encrypted messenger Signal and another popular app, Viber, were blocked in 2024. This year, the authorities banned calls via WhatsApp, the most popular messaging app in Russia, and Telegram, a close second. Roskomnadzor justified the measure by saying the two apps were being used for criminal activities. At the same time, authorities actively promoted a national messenger app called MAX, which critics see as a surveillance tool. The platform, touted by developers and officials as a one-stop shop for messaging, online government services, making payments, and more, openly declares it will share user data with authorities upon request. Experts also say it doesnt use end-to-end encryption. Earlier this week, the government also said it was blocking Roblox, a popular online game platform, saying the step aimed at protecting children from illicit content and pedophiles who meet minors directly in the games chats and then move on to real life. Stanislav Seleznev, cyber security expert and lawyer with the Net Freedom rights group, told The Associated Press that Russian law views any platform where users can message each other as organizers of dissemination of information. This label mandates that platforms have an account with Roskomnadzor so that it could communicate its demands, and give Russia’s security service, the FSB, access to accounts of their users for monitoring; those failing to comply are in violation and can get blocked, Seleznev said. He suggested that these regulations could have been applied to both Roblox and FaceTime. Roblox in October was the second most popular game platform in Russia, with nearly 8 million monthly users, according to media monitoring group Mediascope. Seleznev estimated that possibly tens of millions of Russians have been using FaceTime, especially after calls were banned on WhatsApp and Telegram. He called the restrictions against the service predictable and warned that other sites failing to cooperate with Roskomnadzor “will be blocked, thats obvious. Dasha Litvinova, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced a proposal to weaken vehicle mileage rules for the auto industry, loosening regulatory pressure on automakers to control pollution from gasoline-powered cars and trucks. The plan, if finalized next year, would significantly reduce fuel economy requirements, which set rules on how far new vehicles need to travel on a gallon of gasoline, through the 2031 model year. The administration and automakers say the rules will increase Americans access to the full range of gasoline vehicles they need and can afford. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration projects that the new standards would set the industry fleetwide average for light-duty vehicles at roughly 34.5 miles per gallon in the 2031 model year, down from a projected 50.4 miles per gallon in 2031 under the Biden-era rule. The move is the latest action by the Trump administration to reverse Biden-era policies that encouraged cleaner-running cars and trucks, including electric vehicles, and it sparked criticism from environmental groups. Burning gasoline for vehicles is a major contributor to planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions. “From day one Ive been taking action to make buying a car more affordable, Trump said at a White House event that included top executives from two of the largest U.S. automakers. The rule reverses a Biden-era policy that “forced automakers to build cars using expensive technologies that drove up costs, drove up prices and made the car much worse, Trump said. Automakers applaud and environmentalists decry rule change The action is expected to save consumers about $1,000 off the price of a new car, Trump said. New cars sold for an average of $49,766 on average in October, according to Kelley Blue Book. Automakers applauded the planned changes, which came amid industry complaints that the Biden-era rules were difficult to meet. Ford CEO Jim Farley said the planned rollback was a win for customers and common sense. As Americas largest auto producer, we appreciate President Trumps leadership in aligning fuel economy standards with market realities. We can make real progress on carbon emissions and energy efficiency while still giving customers choice and affordability, he said. Stellantis CEO Antonio Filosa said the automaker appreciates the administrations actions to realign the mileage standards with real world market conditions. Since taking office in January, Trump has relaxed auto tailpipe emissions rules, repealed fines for automakers that do not meet federal mileage standards, and terminated consumer credits of up to $7,500 for EV purchases. Environmentalists decried the rollback. In one stroke Trump is worsening three of our nations most vexing problems: the thirst for oil, high gas pump costs, and global warming, said Dan Becker, director of the Safe Climate Transport Campaign for the Center for Biological Diversity. Gutting the (gas-mileage) program will make cars burn more gas and American families burn more cash,” said Katherine García, director of the Sierra Club’s Clean Transportation for All program. This rollback would move the auto industry backwards, keeping polluting cars on our roads for years to come and threatening the health of millions of Americans, particularly children and the elderly. ‘People want the gasoline car’ Trump has repeatedly pledged to end what he falsely calls an EV mandate, referring incorrectly to Democratic President Joe Bidens target that half of all new vehicle sales be electric by 2030. EVs accounted for about 8% of new vehicle sales in the United States in 2024, according to Cox Automotive. Trump called Democrats’ efforts to promote EVs insane, adding, People want the gasoline car. No federal policy has required auto companies to sell EVs, although California and other states have imposed rules requiring that all new passenger vehicles sold in the state be zero-emission by 2035. Trump and congressional Republicans blocked the California law earlier this year. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy urged his agency to reverse existing fuel economy requirements, known as Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, soon after taking office. In June, he said that standards set under Biden were illegal because they included use of electric vehicles in their calculation. EVs do not run on gasoline. After the June rule revision, the traffic safety administration was empowered to update the requirements. The new rules are going to allow the automakers to make vehicles that Americans want to purchase, not vehicles that Joe Biden and (former Transportation Secretary Pete) Buttigieg want to build, Duffy said Wednesday. Under Biden, automakers were required to average about 50 miles (81 kilometers) per gallon of gas for passenger cars by 2031, compared with about 39 miles (63 kilometers) per gallon today. The Biden administration also increased fuel-economy requirements by 2% each year for light-duty vehicles in every model year from 2027 to 2031, and 2% per year for SUVs and other light trucks from 2029 to 2031. At the same time, it called for stringent tailpipe rules meant to encourage EV adoption. The 2024 standards would have saved 14 billion gallons of gasoline from being burned by 2050, according to the traffic safety administrations 2024 calculations. Abandoning them means that in 2035, cars could produce 22,111 more tons of carbon dioxide per year than under the Biden-era rules. It also means an extra 90 tons a year of deadly soot particles and 4,870 additional tons a year of smog components such as nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds going into the air in coming years. Mileage rules have been implemented since the 1970s energy crisis, and over time, automakers have gradually increased their vehicles average efficiency. Weakening fuel economy standards wont do much to make cars more affordable but is certain to make Americans buy a lot more gasoline,” said Albert Gore, executive director of the Zero Emission Transportation Association. The action also harms domestic manufacturers that have invested heavily in EV technologies and hired thousands of employees to build them, Gore said. GM CEO skips White House event Notaby absent Wednesday was General Motors CEO Mary Barra, who was attending a previously scheduled event in New York City, a company spokesperson said. A GM plant manager represented the automaker at the White House instead. Like Ford and Stellantis, GM has poured billions of dollars into electrification of its fleet. In a statement, the company said it supports the goals of the proposed rule. “We remain committed to offering the best and broadest portfolio of electric and gas-powered vehicles on the market, GM said. Matthew Daly and Alexa St. John, Associated Press Associated Press writers Darlene Superville and Seth Borenstein contributed to this report. The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||