Talk:Andreessen Horowitz

COI Edit Request: a16z speedrun

Hi all! Andreessen Horowitz has hired me to edit the page to include information on their accelerator program a16z speedrun. The program has become a powerful force in the industry in the last few years since its inception and received a good deal of coverage about its structure and selectees, so I feel a small subsection would be appropriate. I think it fits well under the Notable investments section after 2022 (the program started in 2023) but I am open to suggestions. I’ve drafted the text below:

a16z speedrun

Andreessen Horowitz launched the accelerator program a16z speedrun in 2023. Based in San Francisco and Los Angeles, the accelerator program initially focused on funding pre-seed gaming start-ups with investments of up to $750,000 per company. The program is named for the popular gaming term “speedrunning,” which means to finish a game as quickly as possible.

In 2025, speedrun refocused to include start-ups in all industries. In that same year, the program increased its maximum investments from $750,000 to up to $1 million and expanded to accept more companies for each cohort (about 60 per cohort). The acceptance rate has declined to be less than 1%. In addition to funding, awardees are also granted access to exclusive events, networking and marketing opportunities, and credit to select software to build their business. Andersseen Horowitz has also stated a vested interest in continuing relationships with members as they grow, and has provided increased funding for former cohort members following their time in speedrun.

Happy to answer questions and adjust to suggestions/corrections as needed. Thank you so much for your time and collaboration! Aley77 (talk) 12:53, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Done FantasticWikiUser (talk) 07:55, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Exits needs some description

What is 'Exits' section? Can we elaborate what does it mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenorb (talk • contribs) 17:03, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Kenorb!

Exit in venture capital occurs when an investor decides to get rid of their stake in a company. It often happens when Merger & Acquisition (M&A) happens or the company goes public (IPO).

For example, the investor Anna invested in startup Bulba. Some time laterm startup Bulba was acquired by Amazon. This M&A is an exit for the investor Anna, as she gets some money in accordance with the size of her stake in Bulba and Bulba's valuation. If the investment was really cool, usually investor would het a nice amount of money — like 2x, 5x, 10x and more from initial investment. Exits do not happen very often, that's why in venture capital community it's quite cool to have some successful exits and all the investors are proud of them. Eflyant (talk) 17:08, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Andreessen Horowitz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120208230221/http://news.cnet.com/2300-1001_3-10010632.html to http://news.cnet.com/2300-1001_3-10010632.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:23, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Am checker. Checked out. AManNamedEdwan (talk) 23:34, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Andreessen Horowitz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.engineer.ucla.edu/visitor-links/alumni/alumni-profiles-1/ben-horowitz-ms-201990
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140113022103/http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/06/27/clinkle-25-million-square/ to http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/06/27/clinkle-25-million-square/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:31, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion

Andreessen Horowitz makes several investments a year. What if we turned them into a table instead of writing a sentence for each of them? ThaiTee (talk) 17:29, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

• Hmm ThaiTee I don't know. DGG, I think I've seen you comment on a couple of those articles, and if I remember correctly you've said things like "oh this investment/raising funds stuff is just run of the mill, not worth writing into an article". Do I remember that correctly? At any rate, tables are overrated (difficult to edit, visually overwhelming); the current organization, in individual sections, isn't very encyclopedic either: we need readable prose, really. Drmies (talk) 18:03, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
• DGG, I just posted on COIN about this and related articles. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:24, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

It's possible to write readable prose for this sort of material, dividing up the sentences into years.I do it like this:

"In 1999, they invested in X <ref , Y <ref and Z <ref . In 2000, they invested in ....

This can be expanded into

"In 1999, they invested $999 in X <ref , $9999 in Y <ref and $999 in Z <ref . In 2000, they invested in ....

What tends to make this unreadable is giving too many details about the type and location of the company, and the month and date. If the company is notable, information about it will be in the linked article. If not, it will be in the linked reference. However, if I can express it briefly , I sometimes include some of this, eg. the electronics company Z. If there was some routine regulatory or legal attention, a link to that can be added. If major, it may take a phrase, (which was challenged by ...<ref ), or when appropriate a separate sentence or even paragraph or section. I'll sometimes indicate expansion into a new market by saying , for example "the Swiss company X. "

If there are a great many, it can be limited to investments in notable companies (using the WP definition of having an article) or major discriminating generally by $. DGG ( talk ) 00:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

. DGG ( talk ) 00:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@DGG - I've improved the 2014 section a bit using your feedback, what are your thoughts? I can rewrite the rest of the sections as well if you think it would help make the article read better. ThaiTee (talk) 05:52, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

• A rewrite would be good--but please carefully separate the wheat from the chaff. Not all these individual factoids are really worth mentioning. Drmies (talk) 16:39, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
• Got it, Drmies! ThaiTee (talk) 05:28, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

I made it easier for everyone here. I created a nav box template which I added to the bottom of the page. The template can be used to add the investments so that people can easily navigate. I would then suggest shortening the list of investments on the page it would look too promotional - in my opinion - to list everything they have invested in inside the content of the page. I would remove most of their investments and just talk about some of the major ones in the body and keep the rest about the history of the company. Just a suggestion, but the nav box was needed. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:27, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Old thread, but I intend to redo this page at some point using the approach I am doing with Founders Fund. Might take some time, as the section is big, and currently I'm more interested in Peter Thiel companies and there are many other notable FF companies I haven't added yet. But I think that "In 202x, Andreessen Horowitz invested (the exact amount is rarely known) in Company X." does not help the readers with anything, other than a vague sense of what is trendy in that period. It does not tell you about the company's longterm vision or how much it focuses on certain projects/areas of tech or relationships between these companies.

In the case of a16z, I think it might be easier than FF in some regards, as they are less secretive about their companies (/have less lazy web managers) than FF/all the Thiel companies. For example, the American Dynamism companies are already organized in a nice list like this. No need for me to take pain to explain that this company is defense/dual-use/has contracts with DoD/is a Anduril partner.

But I want to ask people for input, as it will fall into "changing long-standing content". Deamonpen (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2025 (UTC)