Diary of a Disrupter: Empowering Women in Entrepreneurship, Investment and Gender Equity With the 200B Club

Welcome to an insightful journey into the world of entrepreneurship, investment, and gender equity with Bridget Greenwood and Amber Ghaddar, co-founders of the pioneering initiative, the 200 Billion Club. Since meeting them at the London Tech Week stage a few years ago, I've closely observed their remarkable trajectory, witnessing a series of accolades that rightly celebrate their efforts towards inclusivity and innovation. Bridget's recent distinction as one of the finalists for the 2023 Women in Web3 Changemakers List, along with Amber's recognition as a consecutive winner of the Women in Fintech Power list in 2021 and 2022, and her notable acknowledgment as one of the Top Women in Crypto in 2022, are clear indicators of their influential roles in the industry. Furthermore, the 200 Billion Club itself has been honored with the Gender Equality Leader award at the 2023 CogX Awards, highlighting their commitment to fostering diversity and inclusivity in entrepreneurship.

In this interview, Bridget and Amber share their compelling stories of navigating the intricate landscapes of finance and technology, leading them to converge their expertise in a mission to address the stark underrepresentation of female founders in the startup ecosystem. Through candid reflections on their personal experiences, challenges encountered and the evolution of their groundbreaking initiative, Bridget and Amber offer invaluable insights into the complex dynamics of investment bias, the importance of role models and the transformative potential of fostering gender parity in entrepreneurship.

Can you tell us about your visionary approach, strategic initiatives and future aspirations to shape a more inclusive and equitable future for entrepreneurial success?

Bridget Greenwood: We come from very different professional backgrounds, and I find it quite interesting that we're now co-founders. I've been a feminist throughout my life, and this became especially pronounced when I became a parent and progressed further in my career. It became increasingly evident that the gender gap is very real and persists in the professional world. The challenges of balancing professional and parenting responsibilities frustrated me as a parent. Since then, I've been spending my time supporting professional women in their senior careers to be able to make sure they have the same advantages as their male counterparts do based on capabilities and abilities.

Before 2015 / 2016, I worked as an independent financial advisor (IFA), and this experience sparked my deep interest in Bitcoin (BTC). I was introduced to Bitcoin during 2015 / 2016   and saw this as a response to the 2008 financial crisis, which was undoubtedly man-made. I delved deep into the world of cryptocurrencies and eventually joined a company that is now known as BCB Group, where I became the first equity partner. This transition led me into the full-time exploration of the Web3 space.

During my time there, I recognized the vast potential this technology held for the world. However, I also saw the importance of including a diverse range of individuals at the design, development and deployment table, including women. This realization motivated us to establish Bigger Pie, aimed at empowering and connecting remarkable women in the field.

I've found tremendous inspiration in being surrounded by numerous global women who are paving the way, generously sharing their spirit and knowledge with others who are entering this field. Along this journey, I've also encountered frustrations regarding funding for female-led founders. Now, I'd like to pass the floor to Amber, who can delve into her own background and shed light on how we came together.

Ambers Ghaddar: My story begins in the field of science, where I pursued extensive education, earning two master's degrees in science, one in business, and eventually a PhD. I was in research initially but soon transitioned into finance, working at Goldman Sachs and later at J.P. Morgan in various roles, including sales, structuring and trading.

Around 2017 and 2018, during the height of the ICO craze, my interest in the cryptocurrency space intensified. I had already been acquainted with Bitcoin back in 2010, but this period marked a significant turning point for me.

I was introduced to the concept of decentralization during my teenage years. I was an active member of an IRC community for the Gnutella network, which, in my view, was the first decentralized peer-to-peer file sharing protocol. This protocol allowed users to download books, movies and music. However, we faced a challenge with the Gnutella protocol – there were more downloaders than uploaders.

To address this issue, at night, many of us would leave our desktops open. You had two choices: you could either click and download a file throughout the night or become an uploader, making your hard drive available for downloaders to access the files you had. Unfortunately, there were very few uploaders, leading to congestion and slow network speeds. We never found a solution to this frustrating problem.

Moving forward, in 2010, I received a Bitcoin white paper, and it felt like a eureka moment. I realized they had solved the problem we faced with Gnutella. They were rewarding miners, equivalent to uploaders in our context. It was essentially the same concept – individuals offering their computer power to provide a service. What intrigued me most was how they rewarded these miners or uploaders with a new, intangible token that was difficult to grasp at the time.

This concept became even more appealing, especially given its emergence during the financial crisis, when people were increasingly recognizing that traditional money was essentially fictional. Money wasn't backed by gold or any tangible asset; it was merely supported by the trust placed in the government. However, at that time, I didn't delve into it further as I was still in the early stages of my career.

I was primarily focused on the investment banking side of things, and there was a lot on my plate. My attention didn't turn back to Bitcoin until 2017 when I was introduced to Ethereum. From there, one thing led to another. I had been considering starting a company, and I saw an incredible opportunity to dive into the cryptocurrency space.

I jumped into this venture without many precautions, but we can discuss that aspect later – how to start your own company. Initially, my co-founders and I envisioned creating a decentralized investment bank that was participative and communicative, which was quite an ambitious undertaking. We embarked on this journey in 2018, right during a market downturn, aiming to raise $20 million. However, we fell short of that goal, and it became clear that we needed to adapt.

That's where the role of a good founder comes in – the ability to pivot when you realize your product-market fit isn't right or when market conditions change. In our case, we shifted our focus from building a decentralized investment bank to providing regulatory-compliant frameworks for banks and asset managers operating in the crypto space. This was in 2019, a time when not many were discussing regulations in the crypto space. However, it was abundantly clear to us that regulations were on the horizon, and they would be stringent. Since then, I've been fully immersed in the cryptocurrency space.

I crossed paths with Bridget in 2020, just a day before the UK lockdown. She was organizing an event for female founders to connect and pitch to venture capitalists. I was quite impressed with the event and kept it in the back of my mind. As we found ourselves confined to our homes during the lockdown, Bridget and I started communicating more frequently. One day, I proposed the idea of building an accelerator for female founders, and that's how our journey began.

How do you view the evolving cryptocurrency and blockchain landscape, and how are emerging use cases like the Metaverse and NFTs making it more inclusive for a diverse audience, including women?

Bridget Greenwood: My initial curiosity stemmed from my background in finance, which led me to explore what Bitcoin had to offer. The industry's unique blend of financial and tech jargon can be a barrier to entry for those without an interest in either finance or tech. The cryptocurrency space presents a unique challenge due to the specialized language of both finance and tech. This combination can make it daunting for newcomers unless they have a genuine interest in either finance or technology.

As we reflect on the early days of cryptocurrencies, it's evident that the space had its limitations in terms of attracting a diverse audience. However, with the emergence of NFTs and the expanding range of applications within Web3, we're witnessing a surge in interest from a broader and more inclusive audience. This trend includes individuals like artists, community builders, and those who might not have initially been drawn to tech or finance. The exposure to these new assets and their potential applications has played a significant role in driving this increased engagement, including among women.

Expanding the range of use cases across various applications will naturally draw in more users, making it increasingly appealing for women to participate.

Amber Ghaddar: Two key points stand out. Firstly, it's crucial to emphasize that during the last bull run, we witnessed a significant surge in the number of women entering the Web3 space. As you rightly pointed out, this surge was primarily driven by the metaverse, NFTs and art. By tapping into the artistic dimension, we empowered alternative artists to create their own NFT collections, fostered community building around feminine themes and facilitated the launch of NFTs.

Secondly, prior to this influx, the statistics were stark - less than 5% of crypto and blockchain companies backed by venture capital had female founders or co-founders.

I believe that when we launched Alliance Block, we were, I think, in the top 20 or something like that. There really weren't many players in the scene at that time. I see two challenges for women. When you consider the enormous hype in 2017-2018, it was primarily finance oriented. You witnessed many individuals like myself, coming from the investment banking side, quitting their jobs and entering the crypto space. It is now widely acknowledged that men tend to take more risks than women. Many women who held secure positions were hesitant to leave those roles, especially if they had families to support.

It's a distinct mentality compared to that of men. Hence, there were more male founders or co-founders transitioning from finance into the crypto space during that period. That's one point. The second point relates to developers. At that time, the majority of developers, I would say around 90%, were men, and there were very few women in the field. However, during the recent bull run, we witnessed a notable shift with more women from the finance sector joining crypto companies or establishing their own crypto ventures, along with an increase in the number of female developers engaging in the crypto space.

And I need to salute NFTs, even though I'm not a big fan of it, that whole period of JPEGs, NFTs. Not a big fan, but we need to salute it because of the change it brought about!

This influx of women has been significant in the crypto space. You've pointed out a sensitive issue here, which is that from a young age, women are often discouraged from taking risks. It doesn't imply that women aren't naturally inclined to take risks; it's more about the societal environment we're raised in, where being a risk-taker is not typically encouraged for women. This is one of the reasons why you find relatively few women in new and high-tech industries. However, the landscape is evolving, and it's changing rapidly.

I can confirm that the younger generation, not that we're old, but those in their 20s, are indeed showing a very different trend in terms of participation. It's a significant shift in percentages. For instance, I recently read that in Algeria, more than 50% of engineering students are women. This highlights the growing interest and active involvement of women in STEM fields.

In both emerging and developed markets, we're witnessing a remarkable trend of women entering what were previously considered male-dominated industries at a much higher rate than before. I'm not just hopeful but rather convinced that the next generation will bring about substantial changes. While achieving complete equality may still be a work in progress, there's no doubt that we will see a significant increase in the presence of women in high-tech industries, senior positions, politics, and many other fields. The future looks promising and increasingly diverse.

What motivated you to establish the 200 Billion Club? While we've covered a lot in our conversations, is there anything else you'd like to share about the inspiration behind its creation?

Bridget Greenwood: For me, it's very simple. I looked up when I was seven years old and saw a woman running the country and managing the Commonwealth. I thought, 'Oh, we're good to go. Women obviously have the top jobs.' Then, my father was working in Iran and had to abruptly finish his contract and come home due to the war in Iran. At that moment, I realized, 'Oh, hang on a minute. You can have all of your education, independence, everything stripped from you.' That's why I've continued to ensure that women are given opportunities.

When I was running the Bigger Pie, that's when I wondered, 'How come we don't have female CEOs who are tech leaders and household names?' That's when I discovered how little VC funding goes to female founders, which unfortunately shows that we're going backward. For me, it's a matter of needing more role models.

The term 'role models' is often understated, but it's incredibly powerful and important. We need to see more of these women in the space who have incredible ideas and the ability to execute them. They also have a level of traction that, if they were male, I genuinely believe would lead to larger and faster investments being made in their ventures.

I don't have the specific opportunity cost calculated for the UK, but it's estimated to be between £200 and £250 billion in GDP by not investing in female founders in the same way. Now, imagine what that cost would be on a global scale. That's the financial cost, but we have no idea about the other costs incurred by not supporting these incredible startups. Women often tend to create startups that address solutions with social impact, sustainability, and financial benefits."

Amber Ghaddar: When we started the company, I participated in a couple of accelerators, and I turned down many others. However, I concluded that most of these accelerators primarily focused on mentoring and networking, rather than ensuring that you secure the necessary funding to complete your funding round successfully. While mentoring and networking are undoubtedly valuable, having the financial resources is even more critical. Without funding, your company is at risk of shutting down.

When Bridget and I began working together, we approached it from a startup perspective. We identified a problem: women were not receiving adequate funding. We asked ourselves, 'Why are women not getting funded?' Is it because they aren't good? So, we outlined action points or areas where we could make a real difference. We didn't want to create just another accelerator program that primarily offered networking and mentoring because we had experienced that before, and in my opinion, it isn't as useful unless you secure the necessary financial backing.

During the pandemic, we embarked on roughly a three-month journey, engaging in discussions with investors, founders, academics, and other stakeholders to understand the real pain points and challenges in the ecosystem.

There are two key points I'd like to emphasize. The first one is networking. Research shows that if you receive a warm introduction to a venture capital organization (VCO), 82% of all VC-funded startups have secured funding through such introductions. Furthermore, if you approach a VC through a warm introduction, your chances of making it to the investment committee increase by a staggering 13 times. This is a significant advantage. However, women often have smaller networks than men, which means their probability of receiving a warm introduction is lower, resulting in lower chances of funding.

To address this problem, we've built a robust network of VCs around us, with over 250 VCs currently involved and over 3,000 VCs in our extended network. We understand their investment preferences, what they are looking for, and their interest in investing in women-led startups. With this knowledge, we can effectively target them with relevant companies, helping to alleviate the first pain point.

The second pain point revolves around the pitch, and there's a lot to discuss in that regard.

I'd like to emphasize two research papers. The first one, published in the Harvard Business Review, revealed an intriguing finding: women are often asked preventive questions, while men are asked promotive questions during investment pitches. Preventive questions focus on the risks of the business, while promotive questions explore opportunities. What's interesting is that both male and female investors tend to ask women preventive questions. However, when you're asked a preventive question, you end up raising five times less than if you're asked a promotive question.

The silver lining here is that if you can identify these preventive questions and respond to them in a promotive manner, this unconscious bias vanishes, and you can secure funding on par with a male founder. This requires training to recognize these questions and answer them in a promotive way.

The second research paper I'd like to mention has a captivating title: 'Don't Pitch Like a Girl.' It also provides valuable insights because it shows that the bias isn't inherently against women.

The bias isn't against women per se, but rather against feminine pitching styles. A fascinating study involving a group of VCs featured four cohorts: men with masculine pitching styles, men with feminine pitching styles, women with masculine pitching styles, and women with feminine pitching styles. Surprisingly, the VCs preferred men with masculine pitching styles, rating them highly. However, just below them were women with a masculine pitching style.

This finding was unexpected because in the corporate world, the dynamics are different. Being too masculine can lead to labels like 'bossy.' In contrast, in the VC world, assertiveness and confidence are valued, which isn't necessarily the case in the corporate setting. This insight prompted us to focus a significant portion of our training on pitching.

As Bridget rightly pointed out earlier, when you're raising a seed round or a Series A round, it's more of a 'beauty show' than a data-driven evaluation. Numbers may not play a significant role at this stage. It's about how effectively you present your team, your vision, and adapt to what the investors believe defines a successful startup founder capable of leading a billion-dollar company

The more I'm in this space, the more evident it becomes that the pitch and how you present yourself matter even more than what you're building or the product itself. It's all about perception.

Before you started this initiative, were there any biases that you encountered in your careers or entrepreneurial journeys? 

Amber Ghaddar: I had quite an amusing discovery over the weekend. I was organizing my Apple photo cloud, and I stumbled upon some old screenshots from my phone dating back to 2015 or maybe 2016. It brought back memories of my time in investment banking, memories I had almost forgotten.

I came across a text message from someone, not even a colleague but more like a junior intern. I distinctly remember my shock when I read it; it was incredibly aggressive and inappropriate. I promptly forwarded it to my boss back then. At the time, I had about two years of experience under my belt.

My boss decided to escalate the matter to HR, and they asked me for my course of action. I hesitated to push it further because, as you know, when you're a woman addressing such issues, you can sometimes be seen as 'the troublesome one.'

To add to the absurdity, they excused the use of vulgar language by saying, 'Well, he was in the military, so it's acceptable.' I couldn't help but shake my head in disbelief when I saw that message again. Frustrating, isn't it?"

Bridget Greenwood: It's understandable how such experiences can be forgotten. Many women in similar situations find themselves needing to put on a resilient front and carry on. You can't allow these incidents to bother you or impact your progress; you have to push them aside and persevere.

The perspective changes when you step out of that environment and look back, realizing that some incidents were more significant than they seemed at the time.

I also recall others advising me to adopt a more masculine approach in my career. It often felt like I could only present one side of myself—the more masculine side. It's a shame because the data actually supports the idea that having a blend of both masculine and feminine traits can be complementary.

In terms of my journey, I started in a factory job, working in sales, production, and production management. The company was relatively small, but we had new directors who came in and managed to turn the company around from being a significant loss leader to the largest profit center. As opportunities for promotion arose, it became apparent that part of my role would involve overseeing the departments within the factories, which were predominantly run by men.

I faced various challenges during my career. In one instance, when my name was proposed for a promotion, someone remarked that male colleagues might have reservations about reporting to a woman. Consequently, they decided not to proceed with my candidacy, which was a clear example of bias.

In another situation, the treatment I received was more subtle. During my tenure as an independent financial advisor, I had recently become a mother and was spending less time in the office. The company's directors, who also had young families, introduced a policy favoring advisors generating a quarter of a million pounds or more in business. If you didn't meet this criteria, they would deduct 70% of your earnings, making it financially impractical to continue working. It's worth noting that female financial advisors were already a minority in the industry. These experiences highlighted the challenges women sometimes face in the workplace, both overt and nuanced, and reinforced my commitment to promoting equal opportunities and fair treatment for all.

Amber Ghaddar: In less mature industries, biases tend to be more prevalent, and this is particularly noticeable in the crypto sector. I recall when we started our company back in 2018, developers often spoke to me in a condescending manner, assuming I had little understanding of coding or the subject matter. It was frustrating, and if I tried to assert myself, I was labeled as aggressive.

In fact, some of the male colleagues we hired even complained to my co-founder that I was being too assertive. Just last week, I encountered a situation that left me quite upset. One of the individuals I was working with spoke to me in a condescending manner, even using terms like 'little chick.' It made me wonder, who are they to address me like that? These experiences highlight that biases still persist in less mature industries.

In more mature industries, biases may not be as overt because there is often a facade of promoting gender diversity and equality. However, beneath the surface, these biases still exist. In fields like investment banking, for example, there's often talk of the need for more women, but it's not always politically correct to address the underlying issues. So while the biases may be less visible, they are still present, albeit better concealed.

It's evident that many biases are at play, and you both have experienced them. I'm curious about your approach to pitch training and how it addresses these biases. How do you engage with VCs to encourage them to look beyond these biases when founders are pitching their startups? What's the underlying strategy for preparing founders in this regard?

Bridget Greenwood: That's an excellent question because unconscious bias carries a significant risk. Surprisingly, if you present a VC with statistics on the limited funding female founders receive just before they hear a pitch, studies have shown that they're more likely to lean into their existing biases against women. So, raising awareness alone isn't sufficient. However, there are specific design principles that VCs can implement, and Amber and I are actively expanding our toolkit in this area.

At first, our focus was on ensuring that founders could navigate the current rules effectively. However, now we're delving deeper into how we can encourage VCs to change their approach and rules for the better. As we mentioned, in the UK, £250 billion is being left on the table due to the underinvestment in female founders. So, if it's discovered that more preventive questions are being posed to a female founder than to her male counterpart, it's a clear sign that change is needed.

These are measurable factors. They are subject to analysis, and they are areas where change is possible. By addressing these aspects, we can create a fairer and more accurate assessment of a startup's potential. This way, we won't miss out on the tremendous opportunities that exist. It's not solely the responsibility of founders; it's encouraging to witness the industry welcoming more diverse VCs and programs supporting their growth. However, there's still a considerable distance to cover in our journey toward greater diversity and equity.

We are fortunate to have over 250 VC partners who are genuinely interested in evaluating their deal flow involving female founders. Initially, we will collaborate closely with them to ensure the effectiveness of the measures they implement, and then we can extend these best practices to a wider audience. Additionally, there are other innovative ideas we are exploring, and perhaps Amber would like to share some of those.

Amber Ghaddar: I want to emphasize what you just mentioned because it's incredibly important. Initially, our approach was to start from the bottom and train female founders to align with what VCs expected. However, thanks to Bridget's insights and our growing experience, we realized that this alone is insufficient. Despite our efforts in raising funds for female founders, the numbers remain disappointingly low on a global scale. While fundraising often resembles a beauty show, it may be somewhat unfair to female founders.

To ask them to speak in a more composed tone, minimize excessive smiling, and similar considerations. Moreover, it's crucial to approach this from top to bottom, effectively training VCs to recognize their biases. They need to understand that, for instance, if they perceive a woman as appearing "too pretty" or smiling too much, it should not result in a 20% deduction from her rating as a strong CEO. We've been actively collaborating with governmental and private partners to implement training and awareness programs within VC structures to address these issues effectively.

I firmly believe that to establish a genuinely unbiased investment committee, the presence of observers is crucial. These observers should be individuals with a keen awareness of biases, capable of pointing out when decisions may be influenced by bias and potentially causing the committee to overlook exceptional opportunities. I understand that not everyone may agree with this perspective, but the data speaks for itself. As Bridget previously pointed out, diverse teams consistently outperform, generating 20% more revenue and being 35% more likely to achieve profitability.

Diversity isn't just a buzzword; it translates into tangible benefits. Diverse teams are 2.0 times more likely to be cash flow positive within three years and 2.3 times more likely to achieve this milestone. The numbers are crystal clear: diversity is excellent for business. It's essential to remember that our goal isn't merely checking a box; we're here to generate profits. And to do that, investing in female founders and diverse entrepreneurs is an unequivocal necessity.

Previous responses have shed light on the significant benefits of achieving gender parity in investment, from unlocking the £200 billion opportunity to the impressive statistics shared by Amber. Is there anything more you'd like to add regarding how gender parity in investment can positively impact the broader economy?

Bridget Greenwood: For me, it's about the missed opportunity of having role models. The presence of diverse founders with innovative ideas and successful ventures serves as inspiration for the next generation, whether they are older individuals pursuing entrepreneurship or younger ones just beginning their journey.

They are emerging from their education, and I had an event yesterday where I was invited to write the foreword for a book dedicated to 50 women in technology. The first half of the book celebrates the pioneers in the history of women in tech and their incredible contributions, while the other 25 profiles the women currently making significant strides in the field. These profiles include individuals from established careers spanning decades to young entrepreneurs just beginning their journeys.

I had the privilege of conversing with these young startup founders, and they expressed their uncertainty about finding role models. It highlights the importance of having more prominent role models in the field. Interestingly, these startups are also making a positive impact by providing broken devices to children, teaching them how to repair them, and then exchanging the fixed device for a new one. This initiative aims to introduce young children to engineering.

Visibility plays a pivotal role, whether it's achieved through the products these individuals create or by witnessing others succeed. We now have examples like Bumble and Canva with more prominent female CEOs, just to name a couple. It's essential to remember that icons like Reese Witherspoon, Dolly Parton, and even the Kardashians, who may not fit the conventional image of business leaders, have successfully built multi-billion-dollar companies.

It's intriguing that people often fail to make the connection between these three household names and their remarkable business achievements as CEOs.

How does your plan for the 200 Billion Club continue to evolve in the coming months or years, and what are your near-term plans?"

Amber Ghadar: We are currently expanding and planning to establish branches of the 200 Billion Club in the Middle East as a first step, with potential expansion into Southeast Asia. We have been in discussions with several partners in those regions to advance this initiative. Additionally, we are preparing to make an announcement about the 200 Billion VC Fund in the coming weeks

We initially had plans to launch our own VC fund, but we have decided to collaborate with an exceptional and highly experienced team. The 200 Billion Club will be an integral part of their investment committee, and they are committed to investing in startups that emerge from the 200 Billion Club. So, in addition to our training programs, we are now also offering investment opportunities. We are eagerly anticipating the developments in 2024.

Bridget Greenwood: Very much so. And in addition to that, the other thing that we've noticed, and it is a progress, as you say, you learn on the journey as you go through it, is that the amount of time that it takes for us and that we give to our founders means that we're limited to how many founders that we can look after. And so now what we're also building is an AI pitching coach, basically taking founders through the journey that we would do when we're working with them and accelerating their progress.

So instead of being able to work with a handful of founders at a time, we can help thousands of founders across the globe to be able to accelerate where they are. And have access to the information, the IP, the coaching, the co-piloting and I'm also building up that database of the investors they can reach out to. So that's another side. And then as we've touched on, it's also making sure that we can work with the VCs to help train them to put in systems that will better allow them to identify these founders and assess these founders. Removing a lot of the bias that's getting in the way of better decisions.

What words of advice or guidance would you offer to women founders who are actively engaged in the blockchain and cryptocurrency space?

Amber Ghaddar: Just do it.

Bridget Greenwood: Was going to mention that Amber will provide practical advice as she always does. Amber typically offers at least four practical tips. First and foremost, ensure you have a well-calculated financial runway that allows you to execute your plans. It's essential because raising funds can be challenging, especially in the current climate, and even more so for female founders.

Networking and mentors are crucial, but it's equally important to understand your business case thoroughly. When aiming for VC funding, focus on building a high-growth startup, as that's what VCs typically seek. Keep in mind that VC funding is just one of many ways to start and fund your business, and it can be the most expensive option.

If your goal is to build a high-growth startup, that's a valid choice. However, it's essential to thoroughly analyze and comprehend the market size you're targeting. Gain a deep understanding of your clients' and customers' pain points. Ensure that you have a solid foundation in place, focusing on the intricate details that make your business viable. There are abundant resources available to help you build your network and access support. Clarity in these areas is crucial for your entrepreneurial journey.

Amber Ghaddar: Thank you for elaborating on the "just do it" concept. One common mistake I made when starting my first company, and something we often observe in most, if not all, first-time founders, is an excessive focus on the grand vision of their company. This approach often results in pitches that present multiple products, various revenue streams, and attempts to solve multiple problems simultaneously.

Whether you're seeking VC funding or not, I highly recommend a different approach. Start by addressing a single problem with a specific solution, and generate revenue from this precise solution before considering expansion into a broader product suite. I want to emphasize this advice because we consistently encounter founders who struggle with it. It can be challenging, especially when you're passionate about your company's vision and want to solve multiple problems at once.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

Other Topics

Cryptocurrencies