An intro to Creators and Capitalism [Pt 1]

Where to Start

I’m a venture capitalist. My job is to find new, undersaturated talent markets and to invest in those before they even know they are venture-scalable. Content and Creators are what I’m betting on. They are my two loves.

Over the last five years, I’ve been watching billions of dollars being thrown to what can only be described as the “creator economy” and it’s clear that most of those bills were set on fire. I don’t want to blame anyone for that - since “Creator” is something so misunderstood that we can’t even decide on its definition or who is/isn’t one.

Creator is a $200B industry. Creators are rich. Creators need this product.

I’ve invested 1) with, 2) for, and 3) in Creators, professionally. I guarantee that there are maybe four or five investors on the planet that can say that. My biggest takeaway is this: Creators is an underdeveloped ecosystem. It’s been entirely misunderstood and hasn’t matured.

Here’s Why:

• Lack of coverage = overgeneralizations. “Creator has shifted in the last five years from a hobbyist to an entrepreneurial endeavor,” is not a fully true statement. Just like “If you read an ad, you’re not a true artist.” There are tons of misleading statements and misrepresented facts that have yet to be challenged due to a lack of coverage and discourse where those conversations typically happen (newsrooms, universities, publishing, etc.)

• An elitist Creative community. Over the years, the term “Creator” and “Creative” have been used synonymously. They are not the same… and to conflate them is out of touch with the incentives and the realities of both groups. To test this: ask any Creative-purist and they will be appalled for their work or themselves to be compared to the most famous and lucrative Creators. So, although there is overlap, and yes, all of these platforms have the ability to amplify great art, but the individuals [Creators] and outcomes [Content] are not the same. Without this distinction, we find ourselves (The Creator Ecosystem) continuing to build and invest aimlessly with a group still stuck on similar issues to the offline Creative Community: artistic complexity and integrity… community impact, etc. If those were the real issues: I doubt any Creative-purist would ever sell their art and definitely never put their pure work next to a Mukbang video.

  Art without financial legs puts true artists at the mercy of their financial fitness… typically burned out until their wits’ end and then slammed into bad contracts with predatory terms. I think it’s a narrative encouraged by those that make those contracts.

What can we all agree to argue on?

1. How can Creators benefit from capitalism without compromising their creativity?

2. Who truly profits from the creator economy?

3. Are Creators “laborers” or “owners"?

All of these answers surround one idea: Creators as Founders.

It’s the venture industry’s fault for turning Creators off to identifying as Founders. Now years into this job — I have true founder friends. It’s given me access to a core truth: very few software owners are Founders. Being a Founder is an expressive act.

This is an observation, not an experience truly learned since I have started things, but I have not Founded something so new, risky and so totally it becomes something. Founding, not running or owning or starting, seems to be a very holistic attempt, even if it starts with one feature, product or business. That is something especially venture investors have been ignoring, which is why we’re turning over rocks until they’re dull. This applies to the types of talent that’s seems to be interesting as much as ideas tried. Maybe even more.

In this movement, we’ll be using holistic early-stage holding companies as a way to give Founders exactly the capitalistic freedom they need to make big decisions (traditional or not). These kinds of expectations are self-selecting, since not many people want that level of pressure to grow into something so huge.

Here comes my Creator observation: Creators can see Content as their first product to something larger. Content also scales in a way that, as an investor, I could underwrite and access as an asset to their business.

Where is the capitalistic advantage?

Not too far off from the traditional startup scene, there are really two puppies that have maximum potential: the Talent (Founders/Creators) and whoever gave them their first financial break (VCs/Management).

If there’s anything that’s really changed in the last five years, it’s management. Management has become open to changing from a service business to an investment vehicle. And good for them.

The next biggest thing that’s changed in the last five years is venture capital. I’ll write an entire post focusing on how VC has changed from an investment vehicle to a service business. I’m, of course, alluding to the rise of incubators, venture studios, accelerators, etc.

Again, this is not a diss. I own an accelerator. But changes this big have 1) growing pains and 2) changes in the relationship with the talent they work with.

This is Part 1. In Part 2, we’re going to focus on where it hurts & who really has a hard time thinking about this: The Audience.

Thank you for taking the time out to read this. REPLY to this email to let me know what you think about this piece OR feel free to find me on X.

— Em.