When VCs pitch, scientists ask the hard questions on every founder's mind

The tables were turned during the i³ building opening event at the National University of Singapore when five venture capitalists (VCs) found themselves in the hot seat, fielding pointed questions from academic scientists in a "reverse-pitching" session.

The format was simple: VCs had five minutes to make their case, then faced questions that revealed as much about the friction between academic rigor and commercial reality as they did about their investment approaches.

The session was moderated by Dr. Sian Wee Tan 陈善威 , NUS Senior Vice President (Innovation and Enterprise), while Dr. Patrick J. Ennis , Venture Partner at Madrona Venture Group, Mr. Fred Farina , Chief Innovation and Corporate Partnerships Officer at Caltech, Prof. Abhik Roychoudhury , Provost's Chair Professor of Computer Science at NUS, and Professor Alberto Sangiovanni-Vincentelli , Edgar L. and Harold H. Buttner Chair at UC Berkeley made up the panel of scientists.

Investor's Pitch: Dr. Guido Appenzeller, Andreessen Horowitz (a16z)

Dr. Guido Appenzeller positioned his $46 billion firm as a start-up oriented company, not just a source of capital—the majority of a16z employees are operating partners that support start-ups in their business needs, not investment professionals.

"It's now an incredible time to start a company, and this is the time when the most interesting start-ups are being built," he declared. As a member of a16z's AI infrastructure fund team himself, Dr. Appenzeller added that "whenever we use AI to reduce cost by five orders of magnitude, usually very interesting things happen that open new use cases."

Similar to how the PC revolution created Intel as the early hardware leader, he estimated AI-based software development tools alone could add $3 trillion in GDP—equivalent to the GDP of France, the seventh largest economy in the world.

Q: (Prof. Abhik) What would you as an investor do to make sure that some of the good start-ups that are there in this generative AI revolution don't get killed by the bigger companies?

A: (Dr. Appenzeller) First of all, we are VCs. If you think we can ensure that a start-up is successful, you're not giving the entrepreneurs nearly enough credit, right? The entrepreneurs are the superstars, we are the support team. That said, I'm generally very optimistic about this because traditionally, the larger the disruption, the more likely it is that a start-up can beat the incumbent.

Investor's Pitch: Dr. Yusi Chen, Granite Asia

Dr. Yusi Chen emphasised his firm's local roots with global reach, highlighting its Singapore headquarters and 20-year track record backing 580 companies, with 115 becoming unicorns and 62 achieving IPOs. His pitch centered on being "the bridge between frontier technology and commercialisation," offering professor-founders comprehensive 360-degree support that extends far beyond capital alone.

"We are local, so we have a team here, and we have global presence. I'm very happy to become the go-to partner for many of the founders here today if you want to start your company here and then go global."

Q: (Dr. Patrick Ennis) I've got a question as a technical founder, and I hear stories about some of my friends. They start a company as a technologist, and the VCs say they're going to support him. But then when there's a hiccup and a problem in the business, they ask the technologist to step aside or fire the person. So, what are you going to do to help me succeed so that I can stay in control and stay with my company throughout the whole journey?

A: (Dr. Chen) When I decide to invest in a company, I'm really investing in the founders because I see their potential. Unlike some VCs who take a very aggressive approach, my strategy is different. I see myself as a coach, working closely with the founder to help them grow from technologist into a strong CEO and business leader. If I don't see that potential in the founder, I wouldn't invest from the very beginning.

Investor's Pitch: Dr. Wen Hsieh, Matter Venture Partners

Dr. Wen H. Hsieh, Ph.D. took a contrarian approach by sharing his observations of the widely reported global wafer shortage during the COVID-19 pandemic period. He noted that money alone is insufficient for hard-tech investment. His $300 million fund assembled strategic Limited Partners (LPs) including TSMC, ASML, and Quanta Computer to help their portfolio companies accelerate their time to market.

"To do hard tech investing, money is necessary but not sufficient. You need a powerful ecosystem. Start-ups need more than money, especially in hard tech because you got to make physical things. Our focus is on hard tech and our definition of hard tech is start-ups founded on hardcore engineering or science. Everything that has software involves hardware, which is particularly difficult for a start-up to manage."

Q: (Prof. Alberto) Say I have a hard tech company. So, I need lots of money, sometimes. So, I will need for sure, Series B. And most of the companies in this domain fail to find the second round. So, first round is okay, but the second round is difficult to find. So why should I choose you?

A: (Dr. Hsieh) In my 20 years, every company I've backed has reached Series B. My $300 million fund focuses on 10 core positions, reserving follow-on capital for Series B and C. I typically enter at Series A and follow on. You can't be a VC and not follow on. That would be like being in a marriage but not committing.

Investor's Pitch: Dr. Dima Kuzmin, 4BIO Capital

Dr. Dima Kuzmin made the case for deep bio investing with striking clarity: his firm focuses on pharmaceutical and biotech companies that exclusively develop treatments for humans, supported by a permanently active $63 billion annual M&A market.

He emphasised that over the last 15 years, only 28% of all new drugs approved by the FDA have been developed by big pharma companies themselves. "Everything else has been acquired from start-ups, indicating strong demand for new biotech innovations."

Currently on his third fund of $155 million, Dr. Kuzmin describes his investment approach: "We invest into the 'how.' If there is something that the biopharma toolbox cannot do today and there is an irresolvable technological problem, we will tap into first-in-class biology, a laboratory-made biological discovery to resolve that problem."

Q: (Mr. Fred Farina) If you're able to choose any area of major disease to go after where you think there's the most potential for impact in venture returns would it be CNS, cancer, metabolic, or cardiac?

A: (Dr. Kuzmin) "I would say oncology is the best commercial returns at 50% of healthcare. It's a massive market. The most underserved biggest area for explosive returns is women's health."

Investor's Pitch: Mr. Aditya Mathur, elev8.vc

Mr. Aditya Mathur positioned his firm as operator-turned-investor, helping deep-tech founders "cross the valley of death," as he described it. elev8.vc has backed Singapore companies across space exploration, advanced materials, AR sensors, robotics, and quantum computing, with 80% of its portfolio Singapore-based.

An ex-semiconductor executive, he promised hands-on support through workshops, networks, and an ignite program specifically designed to help pre-seed companies grow.

"To grow a company, you've got to be able to expand globally, get the networks. Not everyone has networks coming out of college."

Q: (Mr. Fred Farina) If I'm a start-up and you give me seed funding, how do I know that when it's time to get to Series A that there will be resources, your connections to other funds that will have the resources taking me to the next steps?

A: (Mr. Mathur) "Sometimes there's enough funding here in Singapore, but that doesn't always happen. What we're seeing a lot more of is our portfolio companies—about 70%—have gone from seed to Series A or at least the next round of funding, with much of it coming through CVCs globally. We've seen strong interest from Japan, the US, and from many CVCs as well as venture capitalists, so we had a good mix."

Closing Thoughts

The session closed with mutual respect earned through productive dialogue around uncomfortable questions. Scientists got honest answers about dilution, control, and commercial realities. VCs were reminded that deep tech isn't just about moving fast and breaking down the numbers—it's about solving problems that require both capital and patience.

Watch the full reverse pitching session here.