Getting funding in Canada is significantly more difficult, though. There are fewer investors at every stage of the startup lifecycle here, and those that do exist are more risk-averse. The cheques they write are smaller, too.

▲ notduckrabbit 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The trend has been for Canadian startups to find funding outside of Canada. With Cohere the government appears be trying to alter this.

▲

stackghost 3 hours ago | parent [-]

>The trend has been for Canadian startups to find funding outside of Canada.

Yes, this is exactly what I was describing. The deals here tend to suck and are few. Cohere is the exception that proves the rule, if you ask me.

	▲	notduckrabbit 3 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Canadian investment naturally gravitates towards real estate. Current systems and colonial history are conducive to this. Striking to see billboards of real estate agents line major roads of Canadian cities. Founders are not allotted the same sort of financial/cultural capital in Canada.
	▲	deskamess an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		And a govt program to boot. I doubt they get it from non-govt Canadian firms like banks. They usually don't understand startup culture and seem to want close-to-profitability before investment. Risk averse business culture.

▲ triceratops 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Does it have to be Canadian investors though? Why don't Sequoia et al invest in Canadian (or Japanese or German) companies directly? I'm aware that many VC firms have a foreign presence and I'm not talking about that.

It's always struck me as a little weird that a company has to be within driving distance of Sand Hill road to get attention from a Silicon Valley VC. VCs can't hop on a flight to do some due diligence? Video conferencing isn't good enough for monthly status meetings?

▲ CharlieDigital 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

    > VCs can't hop on a flight to do some due diligence?

I think it's more of an issue of familiarity with the regulatory environment. VCs and PE know how to operate in specific legal and regulatory landscapes. With standard paper.

Asking them to operate in new jurisdictions requires a lot of effort and legal know-how; it's not just a matter of cutting a check, but understanding how to navigate the legal landscape for these financial transactions, rights of the investor, tax implications, legal recourse, etc. There's going to be a lot of friction such that they'll either: 1) not seek those opportunities, 2) ask the founders to move to the US if it's a really promising team (see this a lot; was in one startup where a co-founder moved from AUS to the US).

Melanie Perkins talks a bit about this in the Canva episode of How I Built This[0] and how SV wanted them to relocate. AUS government ended up matching some of the investment through a new program so they reached their target for their raise.

[0] https://www.npr.org/2021/02/26/971813519/canva-melanie-perki...

▲ JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Why don't Sequoia et al invest in Canadian (or Japanese or German) companies directly?

Economies of scale. Many investors can review and fund a standard Delaware C corporation without even passing it to outside counsel.

For Canada, not only will you probably special counsel, you may also have additional up front and ongoing accounting costs related to tax treatment, et cetera. You also know that this is potentially a hurdle that start-up will face in every sale and supply-chain contract it signs, unless it relents and just chooses a normal jurisdiction, at which point why don't they just create a Delaware entity and headquarter in Canada?

▲

triceratops 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I take your point, really, and I understand there's more friction. But do the people who authorize the checks also do the beancounting personally?

Accounting and legal stuff is going to be farmed out to licensed professionals regardless of where the company is. And you can't tell me there's a shortage of US + Canada tax or legal specialists.

	▲	JumpCrisscross an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> do the people who authorize the checks also do the beancounting personally? There are a lot of small-shop and even one-man private investors. Increasingly as wealth accumulates and AI automates. > you can't tell me there's a shortage of US + Canada tax or legal specialists They're usually a different partner at a big, expensive firm. Or, if you use a small firm, it means establishing a brand new engagement. I make personal investments. That would be a dealbreaker for me. If I really liked the company I might try to talk a cross-border friend into running a fund that makes the investment so I don't have to deal with the B.S.

▲ bdamm 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not crazy. A VC isn't one person. A VC is a team and a community. Plus you don't really know how that money is tied up and what forces are at play securing it; some of those forces will be immovable or not viable in other countries.

▲

triceratops 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Sure maybe Japanese law and culture are a bit more opaque to your average valley VC. Canada though?

▲

bdamm 3 hours ago | parent [-]

My primary point is that if a particular investor wants to have dinner with a prospect and bring 4 or 5 of his colleagues, he can't easily do that anywhere else. The secondary point may be small or may be massive, nobody can really know since nobody outside of those directly influenced by shadow money could know.

▲

triceratops 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The prospect can fly out to meet the VC and have dinner.

	▲	stackghost 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is what does happen, except "fly out to meet the VC and have dinner" usually means "fly to the Bay Area", rather than "fly to Vancouver or Waterloo", at which point many Canadian founders who want VC funding realize their time is more efficiently spent if they just launch in the US rather than commuting there.

▲ filoleg 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It's always struck me as a little weird that a company has to be within driving distance of Sand Hill road to get attention from a Silicon Valley VC

Is it actually true as of 2026? Asking because it sounds like a pure cope.

I was under the impression that Silicon Valley VCs have no issues with funding tech companies based in major US tech hubs outside of SV(especially ones like NYC).

Canada/Japan/Germany/etc. is a whole separate story though, and I am not contesting that (given there are plenty of very obvious reasons for why a SV-based VC firm wouldn't want to invest in a company based in one of those places).

	▲	triceratops 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What are the obvious reasons?

▲ stackghost 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In my experience VCs suffer from immensely-inflated senses of self-importance, and think that they possess some unique skill/knowledge to "pick the winners", and so they expect you to come kowtow to them rather than deign to come meet you where you're at. Whether or not that's why there's less VC presence/deal flow in Canada I'm not sure.

	▲	triceratops 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Afaik even "come kowtow to them" to get funding isn't enough. A lot of Valley VCs want early stage startups to relocate.