Pinned Tweet
Excited that we can announce Makers Fund IV
It's an incredible time to be building in consumer and interactive entertainment, and I am thrilled we have the opportunity to partner with the extraordinary founders shaping the future
Onward!
@makersfundvc
6
1
37
3,315
amazing work by @Andy_Tsen and the @Aura_Assistant team!
open source
faster and more accurate than claude + competitors
#3 programming app on openrouter
We're open-sourcing Autopilot.
A self-improving agent that plays your game and finds bugs. Unity, Godot and Unreal.
→ 43% more accurate
→ Almost 2X faster
→ Beats Claude Code at playtesting
It’s Computer Use for games – closing the agentic loop and solving the most tedious part of game dev.
Stop being your agent’s tester. Free trial + GitHub below.
1
2
65
if ur investor is playing poker, you're unfortunately cooked
if ur investor is playing bridge, you're going to make it
32
it seems that the secret of being a top tier venture capitalist is having high-quality knitwear
1
147
lot of hand wringing about the $30bn Instinct round
to me, there is a clear and underdiscussed underwriting case to become the new AMEX, serving highly valuable coastal elites who spend a ton on travel, restaurants, and shopping
AMEX market cap is $300bn, still some upside!!!
74
Tyler Matheson retweeted
Don’t be surprised if TENET becomes the Best Picture front runner soon. I think people are seriously underestimating how much this movie is going to connect with audiences including academy voters.
13
171
2,775
55,125
unfortunately i now agree that Tenet is actually pretty good so long as you don’t think about anything and don’t really pay attention to what they’re saying
4
5
267
hard to over emphasize how much 5.5 shook the traditional gaming industry
publisher executives are seeing ai now not just as an efficiency gain but as an existential threat
studio heads don’t want to publish demos or trailers in fear of getting one shotted
crazy times
2
8
313
this may be an unpopular opinion on x, but i find talking to a founder about moats and competition to be quite valuable (if asked respectfully)
ideally a ceo is obsessive over this question. building an amazing product is usually where the thinking stops, and your job is so more than this. this may be obvious, but it’s not how everyone thinks
if you don’t have one now, that’s ok! where will it eventually come from and where does that rank in your list of priorities as ceo. if an investor can squint and see it, then it usually is okay
it also selfishly helps me continue to understand the market, e.g., what is the game on the field, how is the market likely to develop etc. I always learn something from the talented ppl i get the privilege of taking to
Moats! Does anyone have one anymore?
Yes. Yes, they do.
But only a small subset of what people call moats create real long-term value and defensibility.
Not actually a moat:
1. Distribution: This does matter more than ever. Building products has gotten easier, but getting them to customers has not. Distribution, however, does not create durable defensibility. It helps create the raw ingredients for one, but it is not itself a moat.
2. Execution: Yes, speed is critical for startups. But a company that has to sprint forever is not a good business. Ultimately, it will misstep, slow down, and competition will catch up. Speed gives a company more shots on goal as it tries to build a great product and a great business, but it must eventually find something more durable.
3. Brand: The idea is that when everyone is building the same thing, the most resonant brand will win. But for startups, brand works more like customer acquisition spend: Put money in, get growth out. It’s not something that will effectively keep others from competing long-term. Brand can become a true moat over time (as with Coke or Nike or Apple), but it just takes too long to really matter for most startups.
What you're looking for is compounding advantages: a self-reinforcing flywheel that gets stronger and stronger over time, ultimately making a company very hard to compete with long-term.
There are only four compounding advantages that really matter. Every major tech company has at least one:
1. Switching costs: The more deeply embedded a product is in the way a customer works, the harder it is for that customer to switch. This increases retention and revenue per customer, which can be reinvested into the product.
2. Network effects: The more users a product has, the better it gets for everyone. This increases engagement and attracts more users.
3. Scale economies: The more volume a company has, the larger and more efficient its operations can be. This lowers unit costs, funding lower prices or a better product at the same price, further driving up volume.
4. Data effects: The more usage a product has, the more data it generates. This data can be used to improve the product and increase usage.
If you can’t see the potential for any in the startup you’re considering joining, that’s a red flag.
In today’s incredible post, @danhockenmaier shares a simple framework you can run in about an hour after getting an offer:
1. Identify a startup’s compounding advantage
2. Gauge how strong it could get
3. Measure whether it’s working
Inside: dozens of real company examples, the specific metrics to track, and benchmarks for what good and great look like.
Read it here: lennysnewsletter.com/p/how-t…
1
4
257
simple but underappreciated point in the today's market
need:
1. unique access to the best talent
2. good eye to see past credentials + spot hidden gems
3. know how to close when capital and opportunities are abundant
falls apart if you don't have all three; not unlike vc!
2
5
323
fun that all the Digger ad creative is highlighting that it is being panned critically and has 54% on rt
shifting the narrative to it being a blade runner style movie to be re-appraised in a decade
69
