Independent rating of Claremont Creek Ventures VC fund
Overall rating:
11 reviews
About Claremont Creek Ventures VC fund
Website:
Founded:
2005
Number of funds:
2
Number of investments:
79
Number of exits:
15
Headquarters:
Organization type:
Venture Capital
How Claremont Creek Ventures VC fund invests
Average ticket size:
9.59M USD
Smallest investment:
571K USD
Biggest investment:
20M USD
Would lead round:
Yes
Would coinvest:
Yes
Countries where invested:
Sectors of interest:
Biotechnology, Software, Retail, Renewable Energy, Medical, Health Care, Genetics, E-Commerce, Therapeutics, Retail Technology, Pharmaceutical, Oil and Gas, Medical Device, Marketplace, Marketing, Internet of Things, Industrial Automation, Industrial, Hospital, Financial Services, Finance, FinTech, Fashion, Energy, Cloud Computing, Clean Energy, Bioinformatics
Founders' reviews of Claremont Creek Ventures VC fund
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Nat Goldhaber Excellent Partner
Nat Goldhaber has backed two of my previous companies and was a huge asset as a Board member and friend from investment through to sale. They were outbid by another venture firm in the third company. However, Nat continued to provide advice and help me sort through difficulties (even though he had no investment in the company).
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Solid Early Stage Help
Have found CCV to be a solid partner with good understanding of the challenges of Series A companies. They have been helpful with introductions, subsequent fund raising, and operating feedback. Some of their ideas materially benefited the direction of the company.
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Good Experience with Seed Investment
CCV is leading a seed round for my company, and they've been great in introducing us to other prospective investors and helping us navigate strategic relationships. We are working in a health IT space where business models are evolving, and they are able to see ahead to the bigger-picture potential.
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Partners Out of Sync
In my three pitches to CC, I experienced partners who were way out of sync. In our last meeting, four partners were involved - three in the room and one via video conference. Other than the partner who was involved with the first two meetings, none of the others had read the plan (or even seemed briefed). One partner walked in 40 minutes late, another left early. During the meeting, only one seemed engaged. None seemed to 'get' our model or industry.
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Good Feedback
These guys were pretty good at speedy response and very knowledgeable about my niche market. They took the time to research and ask some very good questions even before the pitch. Eventually we were too small a market for them and did not get the investment, but both Paul and John seemed like good guys in my short dealings with them.
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Not that Early Stage?
Met with Randy and Paul. Good enough session, and what we thought was a reasonable level of interest/understanding. They had some good feedback, but next step was "come back when you have sold it X times". Not unreasonable of course, but we would have liked to see more of a level of engagement. We decided to pass on following up with them because we didn't feel enough passion communicated and by the time we hit the milestone they set we were much further along with other conversations.
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Competent, but Lacking Focus
I have met with Claremont on two occasions. Both times I was asked to come in by one partner and then met with another. They gave very curt, "come back when . . . " and never had any desire to answer follow up questions on our pitch, idea, etc. My company is a a little outside their expertise and I feel that they never invested any time in understanding our market. Overall, they were gracious with their time, but were not a value add experience.
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Rude Lemmings
We pitched Claremont and the experience was disappointing. We have a tremendous and unique business model with plenty of revenue opportunities in a hot mobile space. Their vision seems narrowed to Web2.0 startups that don't have a revenue model and compete with all other Web2.0 startups for eyeballs in a crowded space. Dare I say "lemmings""
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Partners Too.
Take the partnering approach with CCV. It's additive to the $ invested. The team has demonstrable execution success in the markets they understand - payments, biotech, internet. They are happy to work and be part of the team.
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
Beware Their Milestone Funding
These guys are smart, and have good knowledge of internet marketing. Their reputation on deals is small tranches based on milestones. You miss them for whatever reason and they'll tighten the screws.
Not reviewed
Older than a year by non-portfolio founder
Unlock more reviews by creating a free account
A Promising New Fund
Claremont Creek is new, but it certainly looks promising. Nat Goldhaber is a really smart guy with plenty of operational experience, including as a founder with successful exits. Randy Hawks is the analytical/finance guy on the team.