Over the past few weeks, I’ve had a few conversations that brought back a sense of déjà vu.

We’re in a strange moment in early-stage investing. On one hand, we’re still seeing the aftermath of 2021, where many first-time founders raised massive seed rounds, hired quickly, burned fast, and are now either shutting down or raising painful down rounds. On the other hand, I’m seeing a new wave of early-stage companies, again led by first-time founders, raising large seed rounds off of little more than a deck.

We’ve been here before. And I think we’re about to repeat the same mistakes.

⏪ Flashback: Seed in Name, Series A in Size

In 2021, the environment was incredibly founder-friendly. Capital was abundant, and seed rounds of $6–10M for pre-PMF startups became commonplace in Israel. Many of these founders were talented, ambitious, and optimistic, but also inexperienced.

I saw it up close: teams growing from 2 to 20 before real customer validation, burn rates climbing before clear value props, and a product roadmap shaped more by headcount than by feedback.

Fast-forward two to three years, and a lot of those companies have very little to show for all that capital. Some have shut down. Others are raising again, but this time at lower valuations, with a heavier cap table and less flexibility.

⏳ Now: A Familiar Pattern Re-Emerges

Today’s market is much more selective, but somehow, this pattern is still repeating.

Founders — often first-timers — are once again raising $6–8M seed rounds with no product, no team, and no real-world validation. It’s not a question of their talent or ambition. But I can’t help but worry that we’re setting them up for the same fate as the 2021 cohort.

I predict that many of these companies will follow a similar path: they’ll hire fast, build fast, burn fast — and still be far from PMF in two or three years. And when the money runs out, they’ll find themselves stuck: not early enough to pivot easily, but not far enough along to justify a strong Series A.

🌱 The Hidden Advantage of Pre-Seed

Here’s the unpopular opinion: pre-seed constraints are good for founders.

Starting with a smaller check forces clarity. It forces focus. It gives teams the breathing room to explore, test, and listen, without the pressure to scale before they’ve earned it.

At pre-seed, the goal isn’t to look impressive. It’s to learn. To understand your customer, test your assumptions, and build something people actually want. That learning gets harder, not easier, with more money and more people around the table.

💰 Capital Can Be a Drug

Raising too much too early often leads to the wrong kind of growth:

• Hiring before product
• Spending before learning
• Signaling success before achieving it

Founders start managing a team, not solving a problem. They start chasing metrics that look good in a board deck but don’t mean much when it comes to PMF.

It’s not that capital is bad, it’s just that the wrong timing can distort everything.

📓 Advice to Founders (and Investors)

If you’re a founder at the start of your journey, here’s my advice:

• Don’t raise more just because you can.
• Don’t let a big check distract you from the hard work of validation.
• Don’t confuse capital with conviction. Real conviction comes from the market, not your investor deck.

And for fellow investors: we need to stop treating capital as a signal of success. A deck and a story aren’t enough. Let’s back learning, not just velocity.

Conclusion: Start Small to Build Big

Some of the best companies we all admire started lean. They used constraints to their advantage. They figured things out before they scaled.

Pre-seed is a chance to stay scrappy, stay close to your customers, and earn the right to raise more. In a world that still celebrates size, I’ll keep championing focus.

Because in the long run, discipline beats dollars. Every time.