Advisory, investing, and building are three ways I work the same gap: a proven technology a hard industry hasn't adopted yet. Here is how each looks in practice.
I work with founders building in capital-intensive markets, where the go-to-market path isn't obvious, the buying cycle is long, and capital structure decisions compound quickly. I've built in that environment.
The pattern I see most: too many go-to-market priorities running in parallel. It feels like momentum. It usually isn't.
In capital-intensive markets the cost of the wrong wedge is high, in time, capital, and organizational focus. One beachhead, one customer type, one use case owned completely before you expand. The discipline to make that call and hold it is one of the most valuable things I can help a founder develop.
Multiple capital sources, complex structures, extended timelines, and a capital formation strategy that needs to evolve as the business does. I know how to think through the structures and tradeoffs, and how to help founders present it credibly to the right parties at the right stage.
At Revolv I raised across multiple separate processes: equity, project financing, and non-dilutive grant capital, structured in parallel with active commercial operations. Before that, over a decade at SunPower structuring M&A and financing in one of the most capital-intensive sectors in clean energy.
What I'm most proud of from the Revolv years isn't the capital raised or the vehicles deployed. It's the people who came together and stayed together for each other as much as for the mission. Building that kind of environment is one of the things I'm most useful for. Not as an advisor looking in from outside, but as someone who has done it from the inside.
Zero-to-one environments are volatile across every dimension simultaneously. The skill isn't endurance. It's building an organization resilient enough to stay focused when everything else demands attention. That means making clear calls early: who to hire, how to treat them, what kind of culture to build before the pressure arrives.
I'd rather be useful to a company and invest in it than write checks at a distance.
Most of my investments are in businesses I'm already close to through advisory work. That is not an accident. I invest where I have genuine conviction earned up close. Mostly idea stage through Series A, in early-stage companies that fit my thesis in energy and industrial technology.
I am looking for a hard, physical industry where the technology is proven and the reason it has not scaled is organizational, not technical, and I intend to build or run the company that closes that gap.
I am moving with intention and with genuine openness. It can be something I start from a blank sheet, or a company where the concept is already proven and what is missing is the operating structure to scale it. Less a job than a problem worth falling in love with.
I'm selective because this kind of work requires real investment from both sides. I take on a small number of relationships at any time.
I work best with founders building integrated platforms in sectors where technology adoption is constrained by operational complexity, in capital-intensive markets with sophisticated sales processes. If the territory maps, reach out directly.