Latest / Women Disrupting Tech / How Anieke Lamers Closes the Inequality Gap by Backing Female Founders with Borski Fund | Ep. 124

Transcript

How Anieke Lamers Closes the Inequality Gap by Backing Female Founders with Borski Fund | Ep. 124 · Women Disrupting Tech

0:10
Welcome to Women Disrupting Tech.
0:13
My name is dear Kanupkas, and on this podcast, I give the women
0:16
who work in tech the platform they need to inspire and empower
0:20
each other. Join me on a journey into the
0:23
world of entrepreneurship, funding biases, and role models
0:28
to discover the strategies for success in the tech industry.
0:32
In other words, how women can disrupt tech.
0:36
Are you ready to listen? Hey, welcome back to Women
0:45
Disrupting Tech and thank you for tuning in to episode 124.
0:51
Investors like to believe that they're rational, like
0:54
data-driven objective. But are they really?
0:59
Especially in venture capital, where investors often have very
1:03
little to go on, they invest in people who feel familiar and
1:08
they back products they can imagine buying themselves.
1:12
For the rest, bias fills the gap.
1:16
Bias is unbreakable unless we change the system.
1:20
And my guest today understands how to do that.
1:23
Anika Lammers is a Venture Partner at Borsky Fund, a Dutch
1:27
VC that invests in female founded and gender diverse tech
1:30
companies. Before becoming an investor at
1:33
Borsky Fund, Anika was a founder herself, and that experience
1:37
gives her a rare perspective on how the system really works and
1:41
how it needs to change. Here are some highlights from
1:45
our conversation. First, trust is built on
1:49
similarity, and that's where bias begins.
1:52
Bias itself isn't bad, it's human, but it needs awareness.
1:56
Second, Impact founders often burn out because they carry
1:59
their mission like Atlas carries the world, and they may need a
2:05
different kind of support. 3rd, it's crucial for founders to
2:10
understand the funds vintage. It can make the difference
2:13
between having time to execute your mission and being pushed
2:17
into a short term exit. Plus, when you're an aspiring
2:21
founder, you'll hear why having a business baby shower might
2:24
just be the perfect way to celebrate your next launch.
2:27
So when you're ready to listen and learn how Anika Lammers
2:31
closes the inequality gap by backing female founders with
2:34
Porsky Fund, please Welcome to women disrupting tech Anika
2:39
Lammers Anika Lammers, welcome to women disrupting tech.
2:43
It's an honor to have you. You're the operating partner at
2:48
Borsky Fund. Tell us how you got into to that
2:52
position and what happened before and what it is like now.
2:56
Yeah, super excited and honoured to be here talking with you
3:00
today. Dear Kim, I have had a long
3:05
journey to get to get to where I am now.
3:09
I started my career in finance and venture capital.
3:13
So actually I did work in PC for quite a long time for an impact
3:20
fund, the corporate venture capital fund for a bank.
3:23
And then I decided around my 30s to take the leap of faith and
3:29
just go and build my own start up out of thin air.
3:35
And that was a really great learning experience, was a lot
3:41
of fun to build, did not turn into the great success that I
3:45
had envisioned. However, it did help me to be, I
3:50
think a much more well-rounded VC now that I'm back in VC.
3:56
So yeah, I, I think for me it feels a bit full circle because
4:02
a long time ago, in 2012, I, I started a network for female
4:08
professionals. It was called the Old Girls
4:11
Network. The idea of it was to help women
4:16
help women because research showed that a lot of women who
4:21
are at the top of organizations were having trouble to help
4:25
their younger women get ahead because they felt they had to
4:30
work really hard for it themselves.
4:32
So, so that these younger women also have to do it by
4:35
themselves. So we wanted to change that.
4:38
And I remember back then I was like an early 20 year olds girl
4:43
and I got to meet all these incredible older, more
4:49
professional and experienced women.
4:51
And two of them were Lauja and Simone, who actually founded
4:56
Borsky Fund. And like, what is it?
5:00
More than 12 years later, I'm having a coffee with them and
5:05
they sort of ambushed me to come back into BC, so it feels a
5:09
little bit like a full circle moment in that sense where I'm
5:14
at now. OK.
5:16
And and for context, what does operating partner mean?
5:21
Yeah, good question. It's a term that comes from
5:25
private equity and it's typically people who have
5:28
operating experience who can help portfolio companies of the
5:33
fund, but also the fund itself with a certain expertise within
5:39
Borsky Fund. I'm not sure if all the
5:41
listeners are aware with Borsky Fund invests in female founders
5:45
and diverse teams across Europe from C to Series A.
5:50
And those are typically companies within the health
5:53
space, within the circular space and what we call future society.
5:59
So it's a lot of different type of topics, but my expertise
6:03
within the fund is mostly deal sourcing and deal flow.
6:07
I also help a few of the portfolio companies and I also
6:12
do some fundraising. So it's quite broad actually
6:15
what I'm doing now within the fund.
6:17
Yeah, that's that's indeed quite broad.
6:20
It's almost a full spectrum. So, so if I understand it
6:28
correctly, what you do in terms of deal sourcing is that you are
6:32
the person who actually selects distance to pitches etcetera?
6:39
Correct. I, I source deals from events
6:42
that I go to. By the way, I don't live in the
6:45
Netherlands, I live in Portugal, so I am abroad a lot.
6:49
And that also helps with I guess getting a broader network talent
6:57
in, but also getting international investors to know
7:02
about Borsky Fund and of course also the the founders
7:08
themselves, right? So yeah, yeah, super exciting.
7:13
I wanna plug into free, free things You said first you, you
7:19
had this old girls network, probably named after the old
7:23
boys network. And what I heard you say is that
7:30
older women at the time found it difficult to support younger
7:36
versions of themselves. Can you double click on that?
7:41
Can you tell us a bit more about how they found it difficult and
7:46
why they found it difficult? Because that I see that still,
7:51
and it still surprises me a lot. Yeah, I have to say that I don't
7:59
personally relate to them that much because I love helping
8:04
younger versions of me and younger people in general.
8:10
And I think Adriana Huffington has a beautiful quote about
8:13
this. It's that there's a special
8:17
place in hell for women who don't help other women.
8:21
That's a bit bold, but I guess if we feel that like from a
8:27
psychological point of view that we have gone through certain
8:32
things that made us tough or made us hard, that we feel that
8:36
was good for us because we became better from that.
8:40
And that we feel that the people who, who follow us, that after
8:44
us, they, they also need to go through that because that was
8:47
good for me. That's, that's how I got shaped.
8:50
So almost like in the sororities and fraternities, you also have
8:55
this hierarchical thing where they sort of haze younger ones.
9:00
Maybe it's from from this perspective, whereas I feel it
9:05
doesn't need to be that way, especially because men are maybe
9:10
a little bit more like used to asking for help and quick to get
9:16
an intro by a buddy or a friend who intros them through a dad or
9:20
an uncle. Yeah, women need to do that more
9:24
for each other. Still, this was 12 years ago and
9:27
it's still is is sometimes an issue indeed.
9:31
Yeah. And the second thing I want to
9:33
double down on is so you've been on both sides of the table of
9:39
the investment table, both as AVC early, then as a founder and
9:45
now again as AVC. So how, how does that shape how
9:50
you look at founders today? How does how does that play into
9:54
how you look at pictures, for instance?
9:56
Or how do you how does that play into how you help founders?
10:02
Yeah. I think what was blatantly
10:07
obvious for me when I was a founder and pitching to
10:12
investors, how I as a quite junior analyst investor before
10:21
that was also asking some questions to companies as if I
10:28
as AVC have more knowledge or more information or I know it
10:33
better because I see more of the market.
10:36
Almost putting yourself above the founder.
10:40
Whereas having gone through the founder journey, I mean, as a
10:46
founder, you breathe your company, it goes under your
10:48
skin, It is all you think about day and night in the weekends
10:53
and holidays, it doesn't matter. And to think that then if you
10:58
see in 1/2 hour meeting can sort of ask that one question that
11:03
you haven't thought about that is so arrogant, you know.
11:08
So I think it changed me a lot by respecting founders even
11:14
more, like I already had fascination and admiration, I
11:17
think for for founders before I was a founder myself.
11:21
But I am very sure that any question that I can ask in a in
11:27
a meeting is something that they have already thought about not
11:30
once, not twice, but maybe 100 times.
11:33
And maybe they've gotten that question as well.
11:35
So I don't pretend to know more about their business or their
11:39
company than they know themselves.
11:41
So I think feces and founders should be treated equal.
11:47
If anything, feces should be founded putting founders more on
11:51
a pedestal because they are ultimately the people who are
11:54
building the companies and. Who are doing and bringing in
11:58
their money? And bringing in their money
12:01
indeed do making them get more returns.
12:06
Yeah. So let's let's for a moment
12:09
shift to the to the startup that you were building.
12:13
I believe it was called Picabonds, but can you tell us a
12:18
bit more about what that was, how how it started and how you
12:22
what you built in the end? Yeah, it started as something
12:30
that came really from the heart because my sister, she lives in
12:35
Australia, she has now two young daughters and I found it
12:41
extremely hard to not be close by them in order to be the aunt
12:47
that I wanted to be in my sister's children's lives.
12:52
And I saw that grief also in the eyes of my parents who were
12:56
first time grandparents back then around COVID time, so they
13:00
weren't even able to easily visit Australia.
13:03
So I wanted to build a tool that sort of helps families with
13:09
young children to connect across distances in a Safeway.
13:15
And the first thing I thought of was like a little cuddly plush
13:21
bear, like a Teletubby thing with a sort of a screen in the
13:25
tummy where you could sort of directly communicate with the
13:28
kids. That was I even, I made like a
13:31
prototype on a drawing of it. And yeah, I, after a few weeks,
13:36
already knew that this is never going to work because I don't
13:39
know anything about hardware. I knew from my BC back that that
13:44
that's a working capital nightmare as well.
13:47
So I already made a kind of quick pivot to a assess like a,
13:55
an online app. And I was very much, let's say,
14:03
attached to the outcome of that company because I was so
14:08
personally involved and invested with it.
14:11
And I think that made it also very hard to be emotionally
14:17
detached and to be more, let's say, having this experimenting
14:21
mindset where you try a lot of different things because it
14:24
really felt like, oh, this is my baby.
14:26
I don't want it to fail. And yeah, that that sort of, I
14:30
don't think was in hindsight the best approach because I know
14:35
that, yeah, if you experiment without feeling any ego or
14:41
without feeling any attachment to the outcome, I think you'll
14:46
get a way higher chance of, of success.
14:49
And that's something that I learned.
14:53
And in the end. Yeah, that's sort of hard though
14:58
I think to approach if, if, if it's your baby, which for for
15:04
many start up founders you included and probably if I would
15:08
be a start up founder, me included as well.
15:12
It's something you're so emotionally attached to that
15:15
failing hurts. Yeah, it does.
15:21
I once had a chat with Nolden. I don't know if you remember
15:27
him, but he's the founder of We Transfer and he was building
15:31
something similar at the time when I was building pick a bond
15:36
and he was super detached to the outcome.
15:39
So he was like really just building it.
15:42
And if it doesn't fail, well, he said you win some you dim sum.
15:46
So he had like this super casual feeling about the failing of
15:52
that company, whereas I, I really felt like the pressure
15:56
was very high because I really wanted it to succeed, not just
16:02
for my own benefit and my own private situation with my
16:06
family, but also for my investors and that sort of
16:12
immense responsibility. It's sort of, it becomes a sort
16:16
of a pressure that makes you less playful and less
16:19
experimenting and I think in the end also less successful.
16:24
So in that sense, the being sort of detached to the outcome is
16:31
definitely a better, I think a better mindset to be successful
16:37
in startup life. Yeah, it's, it's probably more
16:41
productive in the end. But as I said, I can imagine
16:45
it's more it's, it's really difficult.
16:47
Do you think that's also specifically a female trait,
16:52
That they're female founders are more engaged, more deeply
16:58
emotionally attached to what they're building?
17:03
Yeah, I've seen that already. Before I worked for Borsky, I
17:07
worked for Rubio, an impact VC, and I noticed that if you go to
17:13
any impact event, the founder ratio of female founders versus
17:18
male founders is much higher. Like women just like building
17:22
impactful start-ups much more. And what I also learned there is
17:28
that if you're building an impactful startup, you tend to
17:34
place your own, how do you say benefit below the benefit of the
17:40
company because you feel like you're doing it for the greater
17:42
good. And this is ultimately very
17:45
detrimental for the business because as a business, you're
17:48
super dependent on the founders health and also mental health
17:52
and the founder not getting burned out, right?
17:55
So we noticed back then already within Rubio that a lot of these
18:01
impactful founders were burning out because they were feeling
18:06
like they had to do this heavy lifting and carry the weight of
18:10
the world on their shoulders because they're building
18:12
something impactful. And and they they did it at all
18:16
cost, including their own health.
18:18
Yeah, I think that is 100% true. What you're just saying that
18:22
women build more impactful companies and also as a result
18:28
of that, given impactful founders burn out faster than
18:34
non impact founders because they feel that they're doing it for
18:37
the greater good, has some sort of, yeah, not great correlation.
18:44
Let's put it like that. Now, but and how does that help
18:48
you in your current role then, because I can imagine if you
18:52
know that it also helps you, let's say coach people on on on
18:59
how to yeah, how to take care of their mental health, how to
19:02
avoid teeth pitfalls. Yeah, As a matter of fact, I
19:08
started a passion project next to my, my normal works, let's
19:14
say, which I call the VC coach, where I also coach venture
19:19
capital investors on how to, yeah, recognize this and how to,
19:28
yeah, make aligned decisions, not just aligned with their
19:32
investors and getting a higher return on investment.
19:35
But really, yeah, thinking about the power that we have as VCs,
19:40
the the enormous amounts of money that VCs are sitting on,
19:43
and it's really shapes our future because we make the
19:49
decisions. We know where the money will
19:52
flow in the in the future. And that comes with a really
19:57
high responsibility also for those VCs to make aligned
20:01
decisions, not just with their mind, their heart, their guts,
20:06
their body, but also for the planet and humanity.
20:09
And yeah, I think it's really important to help.
20:14
Feces, to be more perceptive also towards their founders and
20:20
the people that they're investing in.
20:23
To not just look at it from a rational point of view, like is
20:28
this a good business case? But also to be more human and to
20:33
be perceptive to what founders need and how you can actually
20:38
help them and coach them indeed. So that is very, very fulfilling
20:45
1. Yeah, I can that I can imagine.
20:48
Do you also coach startup founders on that or is this is
20:52
this a pure VC play? My core focus is on VC
20:56
investors, but I do catch some founders in the slipstream of
21:01
that because in the end, I love helping humans.
21:06
And in that sense, for me, making their dreams come true or
21:12
making their objectives come true, it doesn't matter if it's
21:15
AVC or if it's a founder. The thing is just that I do feel
21:20
that VCs indirectly have way more power 'cause they, like I
21:26
said, I said, sit on such enormous streams of money that I
21:31
feel my impact can be bigger by coaching them.
21:34
And there's already so many founder coaches out there, so.
21:39
Yeah, that's a crowded space for sure.
21:42
So that's I understand question that was still lingering a bit
21:49
in my mind is, is the following. So if, if, if you're pitching,
21:54
many founders sort of have the feel that they have to quote UN
21:59
quote, perform confidently, so they have to overstate
22:06
projections, etcetera in front of investors because the
22:12
investors expect the the hockey stick to go in up into almost
22:17
heaven, at least VC heaven. That's call it that.
22:21
Is there something that you do or that we can all do to change
22:27
that a bit to make it more? Because I, I think going back to
22:31
our, our previous discussion, part of that pressure comes from
22:37
the expectation that there is this hockey stick.
22:43
And so if you take down the expectation a bit, you also give
22:50
room, let's say as an investor, but also give room to yourself
22:54
as a founder to let's say, not, not push yourself to the limit.
22:59
But I was wondering how you look at that?
23:02
I think your question is really like, should we change the
23:06
system or should we change like the female founders, right?
23:09
So I think it's probably a little bit of both because I
23:15
mean, how I approach female founders is already, I think a
23:19
little bit different compared to many other VC investors.
23:22
Because I noticed when I first opened a meeting that founders
23:27
can be even like nervous, you know, like, oh, scary PC.
23:32
And I always tried to make them feel a little bit safe by just
23:36
having a little bit of small talk, have a bit of chit chat,
23:39
like just asking them some questions to make them feel a
23:44
little bit more comfortable and make them feel like we're we're
23:47
equals. What also helps in my case, of
23:51
course, is just literally saying that I've been also in their
23:55
sheets and shoes as a former founder.
24:01
But I think that sort of helps them to feel a little bit more
24:06
comfortable. And then the second part is
24:08
indeed like, how should we change as VCs?
24:13
Like looking at companies, Obviously there's a certain
24:16
model that VCs tend to follow where some are, let's say,
24:22
Unicorn chasers, where one company needs to pay back the
24:26
entire fund. And you already see a bit of a
24:31
change in that, that some VCs are saying, no, we're not
24:35
Unicorn chasers. Actually, we prefer to bet on a
24:40
number of horses that the fill rate is lower, but on average it
24:45
sort of gets to the return that we need to have our investors
24:50
satisfied. And I'm, I'm sure you've heard
24:52
of the term zebras, which are more like the impactful versions
24:58
of the unicorns. Yeah, It's good to figure out
25:05
who are those VCs that are not chasing unicorns, but are more
25:10
interested in building sustainable companies that maybe
25:14
have a lower fail rate, but also maybe less extreme high returns.
25:20
And they are out there, they're your impact funds, some Angel
25:25
collectives. You know, there's, there's a
25:27
number of them out there that are seeing that this is not
25:31
healthy the way the system is built and that we're, let's say,
25:36
pushing a lot of companies over the edge that could have been
25:42
really sustainable, great companies on the longer term.
25:46
But because, yeah, we are short term focused as VCs, they have
25:50
to be pushed to this extreme level and that is then sort of
25:54
either up into the the Unicorn space or out like dead.
26:00
So yeah, from a long term perspective, it would make sense
26:05
to change that hockey stick for sure.
26:07
Yeah. And and now that you mention it
26:11
also having been and still being an investor myself, not in
26:15
startups, but more like like normal quote UN quote
26:20
investment. I would think that spreading
26:23
your money over different horses which have a good chance of
26:26
success actually pays back a bigger fund in the end than just
26:33
chasing that one Unicorn which may or may not be in that
26:37
portfolio. Yeah, Yeah, I agree.
26:42
But you know, VCs are often limited to their 10 year
26:47
timelines, which is what investors want to invest in.
26:51
And that is, yeah, creating a sort of short term push, right,
26:56
Because yeah, you need to exit those companies before a certain
27:01
deadline, if you will. So there's a trend where you see
27:05
more continuity funds that means that that they're investing
27:11
maybe past the 10 year terms. They're also Evergreen funds
27:17
that are just they're just investing and whenever is the
27:22
right time for the company to exit, they're not pushing for an
27:25
exit, but they are they are promising their investors a
27:29
certain out. So yeah, they're it's changing,
27:32
but obviously changing slow. Yeah, change is always slow.
27:37
And well, let me just ask you this, is VC also sort of old
27:44
fashioned in that sense, so also sticking to old headages?
27:50
I think VC is not an industry that's been a long around for a
27:54
very long time, right? I think only, I don't know,
27:58
20-30 years ago, I think there's this story that it once started
28:03
with the whale hunting that they needed to finance whale hunting
28:09
and sort of pulled money and that's how we see started.
28:13
It's not, not that all of an industry and you do see some
28:18
funds being a little bit more innovative.
28:22
There's a trend in US obviously, that funds are broadening their
28:28
mandates. They are investing, for example,
28:32
also in nonprofits or they are investing more in what we call
28:38
in the Netherlands, M Cape and yeah, and there's some funds
28:47
that are partially investing in blockchain, Bitcoin kind of
28:52
crypto things. And yeah, you see, you see this
28:57
happening. But yeah, I don't see that much
29:00
innovation, if that's what you're saying.
29:02
Maybe it is a bit of an old industry in the end, yeah.
29:06
Now, that exactly that is what I meant, because what I've been
29:10
seeing is that at some point VC sort of decided, OK, this is
29:14
going to be the model and they just just stick to it and they
29:18
don't get it sometimes feels like they have blinders all.
29:26
Yeah. So anyway, I wanted to move to
29:30
Borsky because you're operating partner at Borsky Fund.
29:36
You said that you invest in female led companies with growth
29:41
potential and in diverse teams. 2 questions about that.
29:46
One is why specifically because I think Borsky, the name Borsky
29:53
is, is one of the reasons why you invest in women.
29:57
And the, the, the second question on the back of that is
30:00
how do you look at how does the selection process?
30:05
What does it look like? Yeah.
30:07
Well, I don't have to tell you, of course, that less than 2% I
30:11
think of the capital goes to female founders and less than
30:16
10% I think of the senior investment professionals are
30:20
female. So why we invest in gender
30:25
diverse teams is because we want to reduce the gender inequality
30:29
gap. I think there's a lot of money
30:33
that we're missing out on. I once heard the lady from Code
30:37
Vey say, I think it was 30 billion that we miss out on
30:42
annually as a society through the gender inequality gap.
30:46
So from a societal perspective, a lot of innovations don't even
30:50
get to see the day of light because these are, for example,
30:54
femtech investments that are really hard to get funding from
30:58
traditional PCs. So I think that is a clear
31:03
answer to the why. And for those listening who
31:05
don't know, what does Borsky stand for?
31:07
It's named after Joanna Borsky, who was the first female Dutch
31:13
investor who bailed out the Nate Lancer Bank and I think a few
31:20
other banks like AB and Amro in the process as well.
31:22
She inherited money from her rich husband and started
31:27
investing with that. So with that example, we also
31:32
want to invest alongside other female investors in female
31:37
founders and in female innovation.
31:39
So that's what we call our triple effect thesis.
31:46
Our selection process looks very similar to other feces.
31:51
And I always say that we don't invest in founders because they
31:57
are women, but because they are the best.
31:59
And by the way, they also have diverse teams because we know
32:03
that diverse teams outperform non diverse teams.
32:08
We know that they outperform on revenue generation.
32:11
So they tend to be more financially sustainable and
32:15
research also shows that they give better returns.
32:19
So why are we not investing in them?
32:21
It's such a weird, I weird thing if you think about it from an
32:25
investment opportunity perspective.
32:28
So we really see like an under under represented opportunity
32:36
that other investors are not spotting.
32:38
And I personally also think that you have to sometimes be a
32:40
little bit mad or genius or maybe a little bit bit of both
32:44
if you're a female founder and you you're building because it's
32:48
the barriers are much higher than for their male
32:52
counterparts. So yeah, at the moment I think
32:56
it's a great opportunity. ASC, by the way, moving needle
33:02
moving in terms of female founders getting more funding
33:06
over time. I wish that was true.
33:08
Because of the work that Borsky and and probably also other
33:12
female VCs are doing. It is moving, but it is moving
33:16
very slow. I think less than 1% went to
33:23
FICI, less than 1% of FICI capital went to female founders
33:27
a little while ago. Now it's like less than 2%.
33:29
So it's still very low, but it's like 100% increase, you know.
33:35
So in that sense, yeah, it it is moving, but it's moving slow and
33:41
it's moving way too slow. I believe that without Borsky in
33:47
the world, even less money would flow to female founders and that
33:52
would just be detrimental. So I think it's a really great
33:56
trend that other VCs are now also more conscious of this,
34:00
trying to reduce their bias and also trying to invest more in
34:06
female founders. But unfortunately, it's still
34:09
very much needed that we are in the world.
34:12
And I hope that let's say in five or ten years, it will just
34:17
be a nice to have to have a fund that invests in female founders.
34:20
And it's just nice to have like minded people investing in each
34:25
other and having this like like female community.
34:28
But in the end, I hope that it's just not needed anymore one day,
34:32
you know? Is the is the goal of Porsche
34:35
also to make itself obsolete then over time?
34:41
I would love for it to not be needed.
34:43
Like I said, I think for any nonprofit, the goal is to be
34:50
obsolete over time, right? If you have, let's say a war
34:55
child or Save the Children in the end, you would want that no,
34:58
no child is in a war zone and and that you've done a great job
35:03
when that is the case. And then you can sort of say,
35:07
OK, that was a great day. Let's let's end it now.
35:11
So in the end, of course, like that would be great if we don't
35:15
need to fight for female equality over time.
35:19
Yeah. But if it moves as slow as it is
35:22
now, we we will be needed for for a while as well.
35:26
So if I'm informed correctly, you actually have a diverse team
35:31
at Porsche. So it's not all women doing the
35:35
investment, but also the the the board etcetera.
35:38
Do do you see bias still in how you decide about investments or
35:45
has that sort of smoothened out because you're more more
35:51
balanced team because you've been in VC before, It will be
35:55
also. Yeah, I love that question
35:57
because you would say, oh, a female gender lens fund then
36:02
obviously the bias will be lower.
36:04
I guess so. But I think it is also human to
36:08
be biased. Like we are not robots.
36:10
And obviously we also know from statistics that women are more
36:16
likely to invest in other women. So in that sense, that is
36:20
already also kind of like a bias, right?
36:22
So we. Does that does that assumption
36:26
hold true though? Does that assumption hold true?
36:29
In what sense? Well, do women actually really
36:34
invest more in women? Well, yeah, I think the research
36:38
shows that women are more likely to invest in other women.
36:43
So there is already that kind of bias.
36:45
And that is also understandable, right?
36:48
Like if you're investing your money, you want to trust the
36:52
other person. And trust is based on
36:55
similarities because if this person looks and behaves like
36:58
me, then they must be a little bit like me.
37:00
And I trust myself. So makes sense to invest in
37:04
them, right? I think we definitely are also
37:10
biased like any other human being but I think more in a
37:16
positive way. And we still need to call out
37:19
each other on this by creating also a psychological safe
37:24
environment where we can call out each other when we see that
37:27
we are biased. For example, recently we had a
37:31
company that is in the make up space like mascara and yeah,
37:39
yeah, these kind of things. And I am not a typical customer
37:45
for them because I don't really, I'm not really into makeup, to
37:48
be honest. I'm a typical Dutch woman who
37:50
just puts on always the same mascara and that's it, you know?
37:55
And it's then also hard for me to sort of see the business case
38:00
because I'm not the target, you know, and I really need to step
38:04
over my own bias and sort of interview to other people and
38:08
how do you look at this and, you know, these kind of things?
38:11
Because it is. Yeah.
38:13
Then then I am also biased, right?
38:15
If I'm saying, well, I wouldn't use it, so I'm not investing
38:18
because I don't see the use of it, you know, So I don't know if
38:23
that makes. Sense is, is it difficult to
38:26
make the distinction between an investable or company versus
38:33
company that you would buy from? Because essentially that's what
38:37
I'm hearing you say. I would not buy from this
38:38
company, therefore I will not invest in it. 100% that's
38:43
exactly right. So N is one right.
38:47
You shouldn't look at a company because you are a potential
38:50
investor, because if that would happen, that's also why a lot of
38:54
these femtech investments are not getting funded, because the
38:58
traditional male investor doesn't want to invest in a
39:01
tampon or a company that helps solve endometriosis or cervical
39:07
cancer or these kind of things because, well, that's not their
39:10
problem, you know, And there's a huge market for all those
39:14
things. Yeah.
39:16
Just because you, as AVC don't see the use because you're not
39:21
experiencing the problem, doesn't mean that market's not
39:24
there. Yeah, look at the numbers.
39:28
Yeah. But then just that also what I'm
39:33
hearing you say is that you confirm that it is difficult for
39:37
investors in general to see OK to invest in a company that they
39:42
wouldn't don't picture themselves being a customer of.
39:46
Yes, yes. And I think as an investor, we
39:52
all claim to be very rational and looking at the data, but I
39:56
know for a fact that a lot of the decisions are very much got
40:00
an intuition based. And it's also good to use your
40:05
how we say in the Netherlands, Buddha for stunts.
40:07
So your sanity mind check if you know if you know what I mean.
40:14
But your gut feeling? Yeah.
40:17
But at the same time you need to open those blinds, like you
40:21
said, those horse blinds by looking around and asking around
40:28
and not just being myopic in that sense.
40:33
OK. And that that's actually also
40:35
how you do deal dealt with this particular situation with the
40:40
makeup company that you started asking a lot of people like,
40:42
hey, I'm not a customer, but tell, tell me what you think.
40:46
So how exactly how how many people then do you talk to?
40:51
Is this just friends of you that that you run into Like, hey, I'm
40:55
looking at a company or yeah. It's a, it's a number of experts
41:00
that we have in our network, people who do know about this
41:03
market. So we have like a, an outer
41:08
layer of, of borsky fund of people with different
41:12
expertises. And it's also a matter of
41:16
looking at the numbers, like what are the key metrics of the
41:19
company and what do they say? Because I can have an opinion,
41:23
but my former Co founder always has an opinion or like opinions
41:30
are like assholes. Everybody has 1.
41:32
So it's not worth anything. You know, you need to look at
41:36
the data and what does the data tell you?
41:40
So it's a combination of talking to experts, looking at the data,
41:45
and then asking around. Also a little bit in yeah, for
41:50
my friends who I know that are into this topic, like, would you
41:53
use this? And how do you, how do you view
41:54
this? And yeah, that's how I come to
41:57
my own conclusions. OK cool.
42:01
So one more thing about this part.
42:03
I recently spoke to Marion Spear and Simona von Bishtfeld from
42:09
Femstart. Marion mentioned something
42:12
really interesting to me is that the only way we're going to
42:16
change funding of female founders, if we just flood the
42:21
system with female founders to make it so normal to have a
42:27
female founder on board that it will be just a normal thing and
42:34
you can't really work around it anymore as as AVC.
42:38
How do you look at that? Yeah, that's one approach.
42:41
I think getting more female investors would also help.
42:46
As I said, like now 10% of the senior VCs are are female.
42:54
So that would also help a lot. I think that would also result
42:59
in change metrics. Because if you think about it
43:01
from this perspective that I mentioned before that at the
43:05
point, at the at this point in time for so many female
43:09
founders, starting a business, maybe combining that with
43:14
starting a family is such a big barrier that only the crazy and
43:21
the bold ones and the genius ones are doing it.
43:24
And you're leaving out all the the the normal ones to say.
43:31
Ordinary human beings. Ordinary human beings.
43:35
Yeah, exactly. So I think now like I said, the
43:39
statistic is definitely that female Co founded companies tend
43:44
to outperform their male counterparts.
43:47
If the barriers would be decreased for female founders,
43:49
maybe that also will impact that statistic.
43:52
But that's also fine, right? Like it would be, it would be so
43:57
much better world if it would be more equal.
44:01
So yeah, let's let's help those women start all the all those
44:06
companies that they have always dreamed about.
44:09
Because I think not starting is really truly failing, right?
44:16
I think if you look back at life and oh, I wish I had dot, dot,
44:21
dot, you know, like I wish I had started this company or I wish I
44:24
had pursued that dream. Like regrets, I think are the
44:28
worst thing you can have in life and that will chase you until
44:33
you're deathbed. So we should really help those
44:36
women pursue their dreams, whether it's a successor or not.
44:41
Like just as simple as as it is for men to do it.
44:45
And, and what I wanted to say also, I think when I was like 30
44:51
years old and I started my, my former startup, all my friends,
44:55
they were starting families and they were having baby showers
44:59
and they were, you know, getting presents because they had their
45:03
babies born and heard this quote once.
45:06
And I really like the idea is that if we have a female friend
45:10
who's starting a business, we should organize a baby shower
45:15
for her, but around the business and give her like a Notion
45:19
subscription or a tool, you know, that she can use to
45:23
actually make this baby have a successful life and celebrate
45:29
that more in society as well. So yeah, let's do that.
45:36
Yeah, that's a beautiful idea. I'll, I'll for sure mention that
45:40
in the blog. Yeah.
45:42
I mean, I really love that. Let's let's have business baby
45:45
showers because the men are getting those subscriptions as
45:50
well in some way, shape or form. So why not women?
45:57
So I want to talk a bit about the more structural side of the
46:01
of this whole funding the ecosystem.
46:07
So we talked about getting more female founders, getting more
46:12
women to decide on the investment.
46:14
So the senior VC side of it, are there any other things that we
46:20
need to change? Do we need policies, education,
46:26
capital, quota to to support getting more women women?
46:33
Founders getting funded, all of the above.
46:37
But I think from a policy perspective that would make such
46:42
a big change because if you look at it now all my female friends
46:50
that are let's say freelancers or are having a start up and
46:56
they are also thinking about family planning.
47:01
If they need to have maternity leave, they they don't have
47:06
anything to rely on, right. So that is just that is already
47:11
such a big barrier. I think if we could solve this
47:15
issue like from from a governmental perspective, that
47:20
would be already so, so much better.
47:24
And there are obviously like countries that are doing that
47:27
much better than the Netherlands.
47:30
Yeah, for example, Iceland, I think Sweden is also known for
47:33
these. Great parental policies, but
47:36
that's definitely something that is important.
47:39
I know somebody who's very passionate about that.
47:43
You should maybe interview her as well.
47:45
Elena is her name. She has a initiative to change
47:50
it more from from a policy level in the Netherlands.
47:53
I think from an education perspective, it would be really
47:56
great if we teach young girls early on what it is like to be
48:02
an entrepreneur. Maybe even have them create
48:05
their own little company as an assignment for school so that it
48:09
becomes way less of a barrier and they learn this sort of
48:12
playful mindset. And that's OK to fail because I
48:16
think a lot of young girls are really afraid to fail.
48:20
I really liked the book from Yannakanisa Project Prep that
48:24
you probably have met or have heard of, where it's a story of
48:30
a girl who creates her first fashion app.
48:32
I mean, it would have been great if it wasn't a fashion app, but
48:35
let's take it one step at a time.
48:38
Getting more girls in STEM, you know, like in technical areas,
48:44
would be very, very great. And then, yeah, indeed, I think
48:50
ultimately nobody wants quotas, right?
48:53
Like nobody wants to get a position or get investment just
48:57
because of their gender. But unfortunately, we are in a
49:01
situation where like not doing it is not moving the needle
49:07
enough. So I do think that those are
49:09
also needed. So short answer, all of the
49:13
above that you just mentioned. OK.
49:15
And would that, so let's look at the quota for a minute because
49:19
and this is just me picking your brain.
49:22
So would that be like moving towards 10% of any VC portfolio
49:28
needs to be partially women owned business?
49:34
I think 10% would be, in my humble opinion, like a minimum.
49:44
It's just really sad number, isn't it?
49:45
Like if you think about it, it's just yeah, but if you if it's a
49:50
quotum, then I get that you want to set the bar low because you
49:53
kind of hope that it will be higher anyway.
49:58
But just imagine a room with 10 guys and then just one token
50:03
woman in there, you know, like it's just feels like, man, I
50:08
wouldn't want to be in that room, you know?
50:09
So I think it would be so great if we if we wouldn't need the
50:15
quote as at all. So yeah, there's no, there's no
50:18
good answer for yes, 10% is, is what we need.
50:23
It's really, yeah. I wish it was just it, it I wish
50:29
it doesn't matter. But it it it matters.
50:32
Yeah, no, I did that. I understand.
50:35
But it's, yeah, I was more looking like, like should it be
50:39
part of, should it be set on a portfolio level or maybe on a
50:44
fund level even or even on, I don't know.
50:48
So that was more my question. And the 10% to your point is
50:51
really low indeed, especially if you're talking about mixed
50:54
funds, because I think the proportion of mixed teams is now
51:01
way above that 10% threshold. So it doesn't really make sense
51:06
to to set it this low. Yeah, exactly.
51:10
So by by the way, what is the threshold for Porsche to start
51:14
investing in diverse company? How how many women do need to be
51:19
on the cap table? Or how many how much percent of
51:22
the cap capital needs to? Be we have a minimum of 30% of
51:30
the founder shares. So we like to have 1/3 of the
51:34
founders have shares in a company, but that is an informal
51:40
rule. Formally, our rule is a minimum
51:43
of 5% of the cap table because of course there's also maybe
51:49
past funding rounds that made the founders dilute.
51:51
Sometimes we invest in companies that raised 10s of millions of
51:55
dollars and then obviously like the founders are diluted already
51:59
quite a lot. But what's more important is the
52:02
balance. Like what's sad to see sometimes
52:05
is if there's two or three founders and there's, let's say
52:10
one female founder and that structurally she has less shares
52:14
than her male counterparts. And we like to challenge also
52:18
when we see that like why is it like that?
52:21
Is it because the men that invested cash and she did not,
52:25
she needed a salary or whatever, you know, like there needs to be
52:29
a good reasoning for this. And ideally we want to see equal
52:35
shares between whether it's a female or male founder.
52:40
Yeah, yeah. That I can imagine because and,
52:44
and quite quite frankly, I don't think it makes any sense to
52:49
unless a person has joint like after another after an
52:57
investment round, then maybe it makes sense to to give them a
53:01
little less because there's less to be given anyway.
53:04
But then on on the founder level, if you start by giving
53:12
women less of the cap table to begin with, I think you're on
53:17
the wrong foot. Exactly.
53:20
And also the other way around. So I also have experienced where
53:25
a female founder had 98% of the founder share and her male
53:29
counterpart had 2%. And I also started the dialogue
53:34
there with the company. What is the story there?
53:37
Why is it so imbalanced? And yeah, I think that's also a
53:42
healthy discussion to have because ideally you'd have an
53:45
equal share between founders. Yeah, true.
53:52
I want to move to a bit more the practicalities of female
53:57
founders and female investors. So you you probably hear a lot
54:04
of pitches, hear a lot of stories from from start up
54:09
founders. What are things that resonate
54:13
with you as in OK, this this sort of lifts lifts up my ears
54:20
if I would be talking about my cats.
54:24
And what do founders often forget to mention that is
54:29
important? To you, for me, the most
54:33
important thing that sticks is a good founder story.
54:38
I think as humans we are suckers for stories and we've been
54:43
storytelling ever since. We were sitting behind a like a
54:48
campfire and sharing stories with each other.
54:51
And I think the why of the founder, in other words, like
54:57
the product market and founder fit is something that really
55:04
sort of lifts up my ears. I can still reproduce the
55:08
founder story of a company that I invested in like 8 years ago
55:13
with, with Rubio because I thought those were two kick ass
55:17
female founders and I that that story of how they founded that
55:22
company and why they both wanted to find that found that company
55:25
together. I think it's so sticky.
55:29
So I think that also helps you through all the the rough
55:32
patches. So I think there's also this
55:38
other fund in in Belgium, I forgot the name, but they really
55:43
believe that trauma makes a good founder.
55:48
It sounds really. Sounds really horrible, but
55:53
yeah. But if you have experienced some
55:57
sort of real trauma or pain in life and you really want to
56:03
solve that problem for the world, that is going to make you
56:06
extremely resilient as a founder to to solve it.
56:11
So it all really it all links to this founder story that I'm
56:15
saying. So I think if you're pitching
56:19
and you have. No, no, no.
56:22
Please continue. If you're pitching and you
56:23
haven't spoken to a pitch coach, like who can help you with your
56:27
storytelling, I think this is really something valuable not
56:31
just for now, but maybe also for the rest of your life because it
56:35
will make it so much more interesting to listen to and
56:40
also more sticky. Yeah, What makes a good why for
56:46
you? If something comes from the
56:49
heart. So I, I'm a sucker for love
56:55
stories. So I think if somebody like
56:59
recently, they explained how their child was hit by a very
57:06
rare disease and this was kind of game changer because this
57:09
person then started this company that helps young children with
57:15
that certain disease. That is something that you're
57:17
like, wow, you know, like, I really understand the pain
57:20
there. And yeah, that really helps to,
57:25
like I said, through the ups and the downs to pull you through.
57:28
And something I do want to mention is that founders also
57:33
sometimes overlook the fact that there's a lot of internal
57:39
politics as well right within funds.
57:42
So it's really about not just the right idea or the right
57:48
person, but it's very much about about also the right time.
57:53
So sometimes if fun, they are in a certain lifetime of their fund
57:59
or they need to do a deal in a certain geography, or they they
58:06
have this personal experience where the the partner of the
58:10
fund just let's say, had this own problem with their child
58:14
being sick and then recognizes themselves in this problem with
58:18
founders. I would say don't get
58:20
discouraged when you get a no from investors.
58:24
It does not some, it doesn't always link to how good your
58:29
pitch is or how good your company is or how you good you
58:32
are as a founder because there's a lot of politics around
58:37
investment, unfortunately, and not always the the money flows
58:42
to the best founder with the best idea.
58:45
But it's sometimes also very much about timing and and those
58:48
other factors. Yeah.
58:51
How can people select the right feces to talk to?
58:58
Because I I think you need to be in the right vertical.
59:01
You need to be in the right, let's say, funding stage.
59:05
Those are the sort of obvious drivers where you don't want to
59:08
make mistakes. But how do you find out what,
59:12
let's say let's take that fund stage and the geography spread.
59:18
How do you find that out? Can you?
59:21
Usually would be listed on the website of the fund and there's
59:27
a a lot of lists going around of female funds investing at
59:32
certain stages and investing in certain geographies and
59:35
investing with certain mandates. So that is not I think super
59:40
hard to find out. I think what's really hard to
59:44
find out is value match. So you want to find a fund where
59:51
you align on the values of what you stand for as a company and
59:58
maybe as a founder and what their fund for stands for.
1:00:01
And that is really hard to find out.
1:00:03
The only way you can find out is through the talks and with the
1:00:09
by interviewing maybe some of the founders that they have
1:00:12
already invested in as a reference call.
1:00:14
So definitely recommend. Using the power of your peer
1:00:19
network, other, let's say female founders or founders who have
1:00:23
already raised funding from a certain VC and can tell you the
1:00:27
true story, what is it like to work with this VC?
1:00:31
And then of course, it's also quite personal, like one partner
1:00:35
with an NVC might be totally different to another partner
1:00:38
with an NVC. So it's definitely important to
1:00:43
test that. And sometimes it changes also a
1:00:47
little bit over time. Definitely value alignment would
1:00:52
be something that I would encourage you to test.
1:00:54
For example, also fund timeline like the vintage years, what
1:00:59
they call it of a fund. For example, Borsky fund has a
1:01:03
fund vintage of 2021. That's four years ago.
1:01:07
So every company that we invest in now needs to work towards an
1:01:10
exit within five years. And it's really important that
1:01:13
you ask that question when you get investment from AVC because
1:01:17
it gives you your deadline of when or am I, am I needed to
1:01:21
work towards an exit And maybe I don't want to work towards an
1:01:24
exit within five years, maybe I need 10 years, then this fund is
1:01:28
maybe not the right fund for you, you know.
1:01:31
No. So.
1:01:32
Yeah, and that is exactly the answer that I was looking for.
1:01:36
Do do you by the way, ask about vintage as part of the
1:01:40
conversations that you have? Is that a question that you can
1:01:43
just ask AVC? Yeah, for sure.
1:01:47
Yeah, always ask. It's not a sensitive topic for
1:01:50
VCs. Like they can tell you if it's
1:01:52
not already public on some sort of crunch base or public page.
1:01:59
OK, so, oh, I didn't actually know that it was also public
1:02:04
data. OK, but that's good to know as
1:02:06
well. OK, So I want to look towards
1:02:10
the future both for the, let's say the startup scene and Borsky
1:02:15
itself. What does what success look like
1:02:20
for you? For Borsky?
1:02:24
Success for me would be that a gender lens fund is not a must
1:02:29
have, but it's a nice to have because women just like being in
1:02:33
the room with each other and now it's unfortunately very much a
1:02:39
must have. So that would be great success.
1:02:44
And for the broader startup scene, I would say that feces
1:02:51
and founders consider each other as equal partners and that feces
1:03:00
are also more used to openly discussing, for example, their
1:03:08
struggles, which is now all behind closed doors because
1:03:12
feces, they don't transparently communicate anything about their
1:03:18
failures externally, except that you sometimes hear that the
1:03:22
company goes bankrupt, but you never hear VC them talk about
1:03:25
that. It's usually the company that
1:03:27
communicates these kind of things.
1:03:30
And I would like for the VC community to have a bit more of
1:03:36
a founder mindset where it's OK to learn and it's OK to fail.
1:03:42
It's OK to share more about that because that makes as all be
1:03:49
better and be more successful and I think coaching can really
1:03:55
help with that. So if you have somebody who has
1:04:00
your back, as we see, I think you are also able to stand more
1:04:07
in your own best self, if you know what I mean.
1:04:12
Yeah, How can men contribute to these goals?
1:04:16
The the man in VC. Well, I think what you're doing
1:04:19
is obviously quite great. So more dear friends, please.
1:04:26
I think listening, not judging is already a great first step.
1:04:33
And recently I was on a panel, I think you were at that event as
1:04:37
well with Herman from Curiosity VC.
1:04:42
And I think become unconscious of your own unconscious bias
1:04:47
through bias training or through indeed just asking and listening
1:04:53
and being more, more perceptive is already great help.
1:05:00
And yeah, creating a a safe environment for for that.
1:05:05
That is also I think something that would be yeah, would be
1:05:11
very good. So openly asking how can we do
1:05:15
better? That would be all righty great.
1:05:21
Cool, that's ended there. Anika Lammers, thank you very
1:05:25
much for an amazing interview. Really enjoyed this.
1:05:30
If people want to connect with you and learn more about Borski,
1:05:35
where would you like to send them?
1:05:36
They can always send me an e-mail at anika@borskifund.com
1:05:42
and there's also my LinkedIn page that you can follow.
1:05:48
I'm very active on LinkedIn. I also have a coaching website,
1:05:53
thevccoach.com, so feel free to check me out there.
1:06:00
Cool. And we'll include those links in
1:06:01
the show notes. Anika, thank you once more.
1:06:08
Listeners, thank you very much for listening and until the next
1:06:12
episode, keep being awesome. Well, that's it for episode 124.
1:06:21
Women Disrupting Tech with Anika Lammers on how she closes the
1:06:25
inequality gap by backing female founders with Porsky Fund.
1:06:30
Anika and I hope that you found our conversation as insightful
1:06:33
and engaging as we intended it to be.
1:06:36
And if you have any questions for Anik, please share them in
1:06:40
the comments on Spotify, Apple, or YouTube.
1:06:43
I'll make sure you'll receive an answer.
1:06:46
When you want to connect with Anika and learn more about
1:06:49
Porsky Funds and her new initiative, the VC Codes, please
1:06:52
check the links in the show notes.
1:06:55
As usual, you can find to show notes at Women Disrupting
1:06:58
Tactile Block via the link in the caption.
1:07:01
If you've enjoyed listening to this episode, please consider
1:07:04
leaving a rating or review on Spotify or Apple.
1:07:08
Leaving a rating or a review helps new listeners find podcast
1:07:11
and supports my guests by giving them a bigger platform.
1:07:16
And if you're a regular listener, please make sure to
1:07:19
follow Women Disrupting Tag on Spotify, Apple, Amazon, or
1:07:22
YouTube. Following is a simple 0 cost way
1:07:26
to support Anika and my other guests in closing the funding
1:07:30
gap by the end of 2032. For more about Women Disrupting
1:07:34
Tech, please follow the podcast on social media.
1:07:37
You can find it everywhere as at Women Disrupting Tech and you
1:07:42
can also find us on Sub Stack on Subtec.
1:07:45
You'll find in depth stories and behind the scenes insights from
1:07:49
each episode, plus the trends that I spotted across 120 plus
1:07:53
conversations. So don't forget to subscribe to
1:07:57
Whim Disrupting Tech on Subtec. Finally, if you'd like to
1:08:01
connect with me directly, please reach out via e-mail Dirkyon at
1:08:05
Whim Disrupting Tech o'clock or connect with me on LinkedIn.
1:08:10
Simply search for my name, Dirkyon Lucas, and you'll find
1:08:13
me. With that, I wish you a
1:08:15
wonderful day. I hope to see you in the next
1:08:18
episode and until then, keep being awesome.