• Playlist
  • Seattle Startup Toolkit
  • Portfolio
  • About
  • Job Board
  • Future Founders
  • Blog
  • Token Talk
  • News
Menu

Ascend.vc

  • Playlist
  • Seattle Startup Toolkit
  • Portfolio
  • About
  • Job Board
  • Future Founders
  • Blog
  • Token Talk
  • News

LinkedIn Is the New Enterprise Media

February 17, 2026

By: Nate Bek

I never expected LinkedIn to matter this much.

I opened my account in 2018 because a college business class required it. At the time, it felt procedural, a place to park a résumé. Today, it functions as a professional marketplace where reputations are built in public and evaluated in real time. I use it to source investments, assess founders, and watch markets take shape before formal announcements are ever made. 

LinkedIn — love it or hate it — is where your investors, customers, and recruits quietly judge you long before a meeting is scheduled.

That shift framed a recent Ascend AMA with David Walsh, the founder and CEO of Limelight, a platform that helps B2B software companies run paid creator partnerships across LinkedIn, newsletters, podcasts, and other business channels. The conversation centered on a structural change in enterprise distribution. In B2B software, attention is moving away from institutional channels and toward individual voices.

(Watch the full recap here. Password: &0!wd7nP)

LinkedIn now has more than a billion users globally, yet only a small fraction publish regularly. David says only about 1% of users actually create content while the rest just consume. That imbalance created an unusual market dynamic where attention is abundant, and credible supply of content remains limited.

LinkedIn, of course, understands this. In recent years, it invested aggressively in newsletters, native video, creator analytics, and algorithm changes that reward consistent posting. The platform is making the safe bet that the more often professionals open the app daily, the more valuable the network becomes.

As paid acquisition costs rise and traditional media exerts less influence over buying decisions, founders and operators increasingly function as the front door to their companies. A visible voice can attract investors, influence hiring, and shorten sales cycles before a formal pitch deck is even opened. More often than not, the front door is LinkedIn. 

“People want to buy from people,” David says. “Corporations and logos don’t matter the way they used to.”

Before building Limelight, David interviewed nearly 100 B2B creators and more than two dozen heads of marketing. Creators described building trust through tactical insight and lived experience. Marketing leaders described rising acquisition costs and pressure to find new channels. 

That discovery process led to the creation of Limelight, and pushed him to build his personal audience. 

“I started content when I had nothing,” he says. “Didn’t even have a product!” 

He now writes about fundraising challenges, hiring mistakes, and lessons from prior ventures. Over time, these posts built familiarity. Prospects entered sales conversations already aware of how he framed the market. 

(Hell, even I felt like I knew all about him when I first met him over Zoom. Also, it’s here I should note that Ascend is a proud investor in Limelight.) 

From the investor side, founders who publish consistently attract warmer inbound interest. Their writing functions as early diligence, revealing how they think, what they value, and whether they understand their market. In environments where technical features compress quickly, reputation compounds more slowly and becomes harder to displace.

All of this is easier said than done. Execution remains uneven. Open up LinkedIn and it’s probably a slop field. As a result, founders should avoid promoting new features and product updates before building out trust with their audience. 

If you jump straight into marketing, it’s easy to conclude that the whole thing is a waste of time (!). 

“Everyone, when they start out, just writes bottom-of-funnel content,” David says. “It flops.”

David, who now has more than 40K LinkedIn followers (!), says to stay disciplined. Demonstrate insight before promotion, teach us, and then — and only then! — does product marketing land. 

Eventually, as you scale your personal brand and business, you will need to expand quickly into new audiences. The best way to do that is to partner with other creators, building off their brand power. 

At this point, David says to start with a focused group of creators and commit budget for several months. Sporadic campaigns rarely generate meaningful signal. 

For instance Clay, one of Limelight’s early customers, adopted an always-on approach that made the brand a consistent presence in relevant business conversations.

Your brand will retain final approval, but campaigns perform best when creators speak in their own voice. Audiences respond to expertise and authenticity more than to scripts.

 “Business influencers are typically business savvy,” David says. “They care a lot about their personal brand.”

The larger point returns to where our conversation began. For better or worse, LinkedIn is now the distribution layer where investors, customers, and hires observe before they engage. In a market crowded with competent products, visibility and clarity increasingly shape outcomes.

“You need to think about ways to differentiate and ways to stand out from the crowd,” David says. “And there’s no better way to do that than building your own personal brand and creating content.”

Tags LinkedIn, B2B Sales, Founder-led sales

How Startups Are Rethinking Hiring

February 2, 2026

By: Nate Bek

Conventional wisdom holds that startups function as a safety net in times of layoffs. As big companies shed workers, fast-growing newcomers are expected to absorb displaced talent.

It is a comforting narrative, and one that has resurfaced as Big Tech layoffs extended into early 2026, with more than 26,000 employees affected across 59 companies in January alone.

Data from an Ascend survey of early-stage startups tells a different story.

Among the VC-backed startups in our survey, nearly nine in 10 CEOs report actively using AI in the operation or building of their companies. Many say they are operating with significantly smaller teams than they would have needed just a few years ago.

1.jpg
2.jpg
3.jpg
4.jpg
5.jpg
1.jpg 2.jpg 3.jpg 4.jpg 5.jpg

Rather than acting as a counterweight to layoffs, startups appear to be following similar patterns as their larger peers, and in some cases doing so earlier and more decisively.

The difference lies in how those changes show up. At large companies, AI-driven efficiency tends to surface through visible layoffs. At startups, it shows up through hiring plans that never materialize and roles that are never filled.

To better understand how these decisions are being made, Ascend surveyed CEOs of VC-funded startups about how AI is used today, how central it is to their products and operations, and what it means for team size, hiring, and execution. 

The goal was not to forecast long-term labor outcomes, but to capture how founders are designing organizations while they are still small enough for those choices to matter.

The survey reflects a narrow but intentional sample. Respondents were CEOs of VC-funded startups, primarily based on the West Coast, and overwhelmingly early stage. 

The average company was founded in 2022. Most respondents were between pre-seed and seed. Excluding a small number of larger outliers, the median company had between one and 10 employees, with an estimated average team size of roughly 14.

These are companies still deciding which roles to hire in the first place.

Here are some key takeaways:

  • Eighty-nine percent of respondents reported using AI in the operation or building of their startup, while only 11% reported no usage. Adoption spans both AI-native and non-AI-native companies.

  • Roughly 30% said AI is the core product, another 27% described it as a major feature, and the largest share, about 41%, said AI is used internally but is not customer-facing. Very few characterized their use as experimental.

  • Most startups use multiple models. OpenAI and Anthropic were the most commonly cited, each used by more than 80% of respondents. Google’s Gemini followed at roughly two-thirds adoption. Open-source and alternative models appeared at lower but meaningful levels, reflecting a willingness to mix and match tools in pursuit of speed and cost efficiency.

Where AI shows up most clearly is in work that directly affects execution velocity as code generation is nearly universal. Product and program management, marketing, and sales follow closely, with customer service also ranking high. 

(Usage in HR and finance is present but less common, indicating that AI adoption tends to concentrate first in functions tied to building, shipping, and selling before expanding into back-office operations.)

When founders were asked to compare their current team size with what they would have needed in 2021, responses varied. About 17% said they operate at roughly the same size, while 9% said they need more employees than they would have before 2022. Nearly 30% said it is too early to estimate. Among the remaining respondents, however, a clear pattern emerged. Many reported operating with fewer employees because of generative AI and automation, with several citing reductions in the 25% to 60% range and a smaller group reporting reductions of more than 60%.

Those changes are not evenly distributed across roles. Engineering and marketing were most frequently cited as functions where hiring had been reduced or avoided, followed by customer support, operations, and data and analysis. Product management and QA also appeared frequently, while finance and HR were less commonly affected. Some companies reported no role reductions at all, underscoring that these decisions remain highly context-dependent.

Startups are reorganizing work in ways that mirror their Big Tech peers, and in some cases doing so at a faster pace. AI is reshaping how teams are built long before those effects show up in public headcount data, changing not who gets laid off, but who never gets hired in the first place.

At the earliest stages of company building, the impact of AI on work is subtle rather than dramatic. It accumulates one hiring decision at a time.


The limitations of the survey: sample size is modest at 70, respondents skew West Coast, and the companies are young enough that long-term impacts remain uncertain. The data is self-reported.

Tags Ascend, Startup Hiring, Layoffs

Investing in AZX

January 28, 2026

By: Nate Bek and Kirby Winfield

Today, we are excited to announce our investment in AZX, the vertical AI platform for critical infrastructure. We invested in the company’s $6 million pre-Seed alongside AI2 Incubator, SFV, Founders’ Co-op, Kompas, Powerhouse Ventures, and Stepchange Ventures. 

Electricity demand is rising as the grid prepares for more than $200 billion in annual investment. Utilities and energy operators are under pressure to adopt AI while maintaining security, reliability, and system integrity. Many have struggled to find partners with both credible AI capability and deep domain experience across energy, utilities, climate, and sustainability.

Concerns around data leakage, system integration, and internal change remain high. As a result, teams are often forced to choose between labor-heavy consultants and rigid SaaS tools that fail to reflect operational reality.

AZX understood this gap early and built a partnership model designed to carry AI from strategy through execution, supported by reusable technologies that accelerate delivery over time.

The company starts with high-touch strategy and bespoke applications, then extracts reusability capabilities into a growing platform to accelerate value. Each engagement strengthens the underlying system and shortens future deployments. 

Customers include Puget Sound Energy, CBRE, Trilliant, Franklin Energy, among others. Since last year, revenue is up 10x as demand grows.

The founding team brings deep experience across energy and software. CEO Aaron Goldfeder is a two-time exited founder with a track record of building and selling into complex environments. We backed Aaron before and have seen firsthand how he operates. He’s joined by long-time collaborators Rich Evans and Michael Albrecht. 

AZX, founded in 2024, now employs roughly 20 full-time staff and contractors. The Public Benefit Corporation plans to double this year, with hiring across engineering and operations. Open roles can be found on our Job Board.

AZX occupies a clear middle ground in the market. Large integrators like Accenture move slowly and lack proprietary data models needed for safe AI deployment. Horizontal SaaS platforms struggle with domain specificity and real-world constraints. Platforms such as Palantir offer power but are often priced beyond reach for mid-market and regulated buyers.

We invested because the company brings together the right team, model, and timing to one of the most consequential transitions ahead.

We are proud to back the AZX team.

Tags AZX Funding, AZX, Ascend

Investing in Govstream

December 4, 2025

By: Kirby Winfield & Nate Bek

Today, we’re excited to announce our investment in Govstream.ai., the startup building AI-native permitting tools for local governments. The $3.6 million Seed round was led by 47th Street Partners, with participation from Nellore Capital. 

Housing affordability in the United States has become a supply problem, and supply depends on approvals. For years, the country has built fewer homes than its growing population requires, and the systems responsible for permitting new housing have not kept pace. 

Cities now carry expectations for housing, ADUs, and small business activity that exceed the capacity of the tools available to them. Anyone who has tried to build anything in Seattle or California knows that ADUs, tenant improvements, and even simple sign replacements can bounce around intake queues for weeks.

Govstream.ai gives cities a way to shorten permitting timelines from months to weeks, on a path to days. The company sells a modern permitting layer by unifying chat, email, voice, plans, and policies into a single conversational system. It helps staff interpret what is being submitted rather than forcing them to manage fragmented workflows.

“Cities are under intense pressure to add housing, support small businesses, and keep development sustainable,” Govstream CEO and founder Safouen “Saf” Rabah says. “All while working inside permitting systems that were never really rethought for this moment.” 

We first met Saf at a panel we hosted, and the conversation continued across a series of walk-and-talk meetings that underscored how well he understands the domain. Saf spent years at Socrata and Tyler Technologies building analytics and data products across government verticals, learning the mechanics of public-sector procurement and the expectations of the people who rely on these systems. At Tyler, he helped earn the trust of 972 customers and grow ARR past $16 million with a 75% annual rate.

“A few walk-and-talk meetings later, it became clear to me that our odds of success will increase with Ascend on our side,” Saf tells us.

Govstream.ai is already live with the City of Bellevue and working with a growing set of jurisdictions ready to move beyond pilots. The company has a team of six, and plans to use the fresh funding to hire across engineering, AI, and product roles. You can find those job posts as they go live on our Ascend Job Board. 

Permitting is the kind of unsexy problem that rarely earns attention, even though it governs whether homes and small businesses ever come to life.  

“Permitting has been digitized in pieces but not truly modernized end to end,” says Saf, describing his goal of giving permitters and planners an intelligent layer on top of the systems they already use. “That is how cities move more homes and critical infrastructure from submitted to approved without burning people out on either side of the counter.”

We invested because permitting remains one of the most fixable levers in the housing crisis, and because Govstream approaches the problem with technical rigor and an understanding of how cities operate. Saf brings credibility, clarity, and persistence to a sector where those qualities determine whether new technology is ever adopted.

We are proud to back the Govstream team from day one.

Tags Govstream, Govstream.ai, Ascend

Investing in Limelight

November 20, 2025

By: Nate Bek and Kirby Winfield

Today we are excited to announce our investment in Limelight, the AI platform that automates personality-led growth for B2B companies. Ascend invested in the $2 million seed round, joining a strong group that includes lead investor SNR Capital and other early supporters.

B2B buying behavior is shifting faster than most marketing teams can keep up with. Paid channels are saturated and CAC is rising. Buyers, especially younger ones, trust individual voices more than corporate messaging. The problem is that influencer work in B2B is still stitched together with spreadsheets, DMs, and guesswork. Brands want scale, but the operational overhead keeps the channel out of reach.

The Limelight platform automates creator discovery, activation, and ROI measurement. It gives B2B teams a system of record for personality-led growth. Early traction is strong, with customers seeing measurable improvements in conversion and lead quality. The platform hits the rare balance of usability, depth, and clear business impact.

What makes Limelight more compelling is the vision beyond the current product. The team is building an autonomous B2B marketing workforce composed entirely of AI agents. The first phase automates influencer matching and campaign operations. The next phases expand into content creation, distribution, and lead nurturing. It is a practical roadmap that starts with obvious pain points and ladders into a broader operating system for B2B growth.

The founding team is exceptional. CEO David Walsh is a three-time founder with two exits and deep experience leading B2B go-to-market teams. He’s also an influencer in his own right with nearly 40,000 LinkedIn followers. CTO Youngjae Ji brings more than 20 years of engineering experience and is widely regarded as a top one percent technical talent, something Uber’s CTO underscored in his endorsement. 

B2B digital ad spend is $39 billion, but only a small share goes to influencer and UGC channels, yet this niche is projected to grow several times over in the next few years. The supply side is swelling, with more than 18 million professionals using LinkedIn’s creator tools. Brands are searching for efficient channels as paid search economics decline. 

Competition will intensify, but the company has advantages that generalist players cannot match. The two-sided marketplace creates defensibility. The platform collects performance data across creators and campaigns, which reinforces matching accuracy. Most marketing tools today produce words. Limelight takes responsibility for outcomes. 

We invested because Limelight is building the infrastructure behind a structural shift in B2B buying. SNR Capital is a great co-investor to build alongside, and their conviction reinforces the scale of the opportunity.

We are proud to back the Limelight team from day one.

Tags LimelightHQ, Ascend, SNR Capital

How startups should think about Generative Engine Optimization

November 7, 2025

By: Nate Bek

When was the last time you actually Googled something?

More people are skipping the search bar altogether, opening ChatGPT, Gemini, or Perplexity instead. They ask a question, get a full answer, and move on. The results do not come as links but as language.

I first came across Generative Engine Optimization, or GEO, when I noticed something strange in our traffic data at Ascend. About 14% of our site traffic was coming from ChatGPT queries. We ran experiments, testing prompts like “best B2B AI venture firms in Seattle,” and realized Ascend would only appear if the query was extremely specific. That small insight led to a bigger question: how do you make your company visible in a world where people no longer “Google it,” but ask a language model instead?

“They are similar in that both involve algorithms that guide how customers make decisions,” says Patrick O’Donnell, CTO of Gumshoe AI, speaking at an Ascend AMA session last month. “But GEO builds on SEO. Everything you have done for SEO still helps, but GEO adds another layer.”

Generative engines pull from a broader set of sources and infer context in more complex ways. “So SEO focuses on short keywords and top links,” adds Ethan Finkel, founding product manager at Gauge. “GEO is about being present across those longer, contextual searches.”

As generative AI reshapes how people discover information, visibility has become a technical problem. I spoke with two people building tools to solve it: Finkel of Gauge and O’Donnell of Gumshoe AI, both helping companies understand how they appear inside large language models.

(If you’d like to watch the full AMA recording, you can find that here. Passcode: %r?8S?m3)

Otherwise, this conversation has been edited for clarity and brevity. Enjoy! 


Watch the full recording here. Passcode

Nate: Thanks for being here. Patrick, let’s start with you. Most people here understand SEO, ranking high on Google. In the context of GEO, what does that actually mean, and how is it different?

Patrick: They are similar in that both involve algorithms that guide how customers make decisions. But GEO builds on SEO. Everything you have done for SEO still helps, but GEO adds another layer. Generative engines pull from a much broader range of sources and infer associations through complex algorithms. The key lesson is to publish content that clearly communicates what you are good at. When people search “best running shoes,” the models infer which brands tend to appear near those words. It is like SEO but deeper, more contextual, and increasingly personalized to the user.

Nate: Ethan, let’s dig into the mechanics. How do generative engines surface information differently than Google’s SEO model?

Ethan: There are two main paths. First, the model might rely on what it already “knows,” its internal training data. Those answers are fixed until the next model update. The second path is retrieval: it searches the web in real time.

When you enter a query, an LLM often translates it into multiple Google searches, executes them, and parses the results. On average, we have found that LLMs run about 2.7 Google searches for each user query. Humans tend to write two- to three-word searches. AI searches average 6.7 words, and sometimes 15 or more. That means they are pulling from long-tail, descriptive queries, different results than you would get manually. The model then reads those pages, extracts relevant context, and synthesizes a response.

So SEO focuses on short keywords and top links. GEO is about being present across those longer, contextual searches. And that is evolving fast: ChatGPT, for instance, now integrates directly with Shopify, meaning product data can feed straight into its responses.

Nate: Patrick, Gumshoe focuses heavily on analytics. How do you evaluate how companies appear across these engines?

Patrick: We start by identifying your likely customer personas, the topics they care about, and the queries they might make. We then run those prompts across the models you care about, ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and analyze the responses. We see which brands are mentioned, which appear first, and what sources the models cite.

You start noticing patterns. For example, Google’s AI Overviews love YouTube, Reddit, and Google Maps data. Across categories, the largest share of citations still comes from company domains, Nike, Reebok, Adidas, Brooks, those official sources. What is interesting is that many URLs cited in AI Overviews are not even in the top 10 Google search results. The engines are pulling from deeper parts of the web.

We publish some of this data on research.zero.gumshoe.ai, where we break down which sites are most cited by category and model. The takeaway is that these models have clear biases based on what data they were trained or connected to. Google leans on YouTube, OpenAI leans more on Reddit, and access to those data pipelines influences what they surface.

Nate: Ethan, I have heard Reddit’s influence is waning. Are you seeing that too?

Ethan: Definitely. In September, we saw Reddit’s share of citations drop sharply, from 22 percent of answers mentioning Reddit to about 16 percent. Reddit accounted for roughly 9 percent of all citations across AI answers earlier in the year; now it is closer to 2 percent. Google changed its algorithm to limit how many pages models can access beyond the first search page, which likely contributed.

That said, Reddit rebounded a bit in October. It is always shifting. But some principles hold steady. We break GEO strategy into three categories:

  1. First-party content: What you publish on your own site.

  2. Third-party coverage: Articles about you on sites like Forbes or Wikipedia.

  3. Organic communities: Platforms like LinkedIn, Reddit, Medium, and Dev.to.

First-party content is consistently strongest. Write about your company, your product, and the problems you solve. Listicles perform incredibly well, LLMs love them. They are structured, easy to parse, and contextually rich.

Wikipedia is another huge factor. If you can get a page, do it. It is a major signal of legitimacy for LLMs. Paid listicles can help too, but writing your own version on your site is often equally effective.

As for social media, Twitter content is not indexed well by LLMs, and Reddit’s influence, as I said, fluctuates. So focus first on your own site and credible third-party pages before branching 

Nate: When you think about ChatGPT, Gemini, or Perplexity, do you tailor strategies for each model?

Patrick: Right now, it is more about where users are. OpenAI and Google dominate, even if people do not realize Gemini powers most Google searches.

Some models, like Perplexity, rely heavily on live web results, which helps startups appear quickly. But static models, those with older data, take much longer to reflect new companies. For new startups, targeting engines that pull from the web dynamically is key. Older, closed models may not surface you for a year or more.

Nate: Most of the founders we work with are pre-seed or seed stage. When does it make sense to seriously invest in GEO?

Ethan: The biggest factor is market competitiveness. In crowded markets like HR or recruiting, it is hard for early-stage startups to compete with established players’ content volume. But in focused, high-value niches, like B2B SaaS for specific verticals, it is different. For example, one of our clients sells to venture firms. Their audience is small but high-value, and the space was not saturated with content. They gained visibility early.

In general, Series A and B companies benefit the most. But if you are in a niche market, starting early pays off. In highly competitive markets, you might wait until Series C or later to prioritize GEO seriously.

Patrick: I agree. With Gumshoe, we often find value in identifying content gaps, areas where you think you are strong but are not ranking. Once you see that, you can target those areas directly. Our tools even generate content recommendations or scripts based on that gap analysis. It is about aligning what you know you are good at with what the models recognize you for.

Nate: Beyond strategy, what technology are you both building to support GEO?

Ethan: Gauge runs hundreds of prompts daily across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and Google’s AI Overviews. We analyze which content performs best, then give tailored recommendations. Most often, that means writing new content or refining existing pages, because that is what models still rely on.

Looking ahead, ChatGPT’s new “apps” framework is huge. Companies can now connect APIs directly to ChatGPT. Zillow, for example, can surface apartment listings inside the chat interface. That is the next step for GEO, feeding structured data directly into models, not just publishing text.

Patrick: We are seeing the same trend. Right now, we use proxies like search volume and content freshness to approximate what users care about. And freshness matters a lot. Roughly 70 to 80% of citations we track come from content less than six months old. Some marketers even test tricks, like updating publish dates without changing the content. It works briefly, but quality updates still matter more long-term.

Nate: There has been speculation that LLMs will launch ad networks. What happens when that starts?

Ethan: It will change everything. Google Ads gives marketers insight into keyword volume and CPCs. Once ChatGPT or Perplexity introduce ads, they will have to share similar data, prompt frequency, cost metrics, and audience insights. That will make GEO measurable the way SEO is today.

Right now, we infer search intent through indirect data. Ads will bring transparency and show us what people actually ask these models, which will massively improve optimization strategies.

Patrick: Exactly. Until then, we are using heuristics to estimate volume. We translate topics into keyword clusters, track web search traffic, and assume correlation. It is not perfect, but it works reasonably well. Freshness is still the biggest signal. Keep your content updated and relevant.

Nate: It seems everything comes back to content. Should companies use AI to create it?

Patrick: If you have great writers, use them. But that is not always realistic. We have trained Gumshoe’s content generator to mirror brand tone and adapt phrasing to what models prefer. We have experimented with wording, how often to repeat brand names, when to use pronouns, the level of technical detail, and we have found consistent patterns that perform well.

You can schedule monthly updates, generate new articles, and test performance. We have not seen any penalty for using AI-generated text yet, and it is far more efficient than maintaining a large writing team.

Ethan: We usually recommend an AI-first workflow. Generate your draft with AI, then have a human edit it. That combination produces scale and quality. Studies show AI-written content is not penalized as long as it is coherent and useful. The human touch adds polish and ensures brand alignment.

Patrick: We have even added a feature that trains on your existing copy so it can write in your voice automatically. But quality still matters. Models will get better at distinguishing high-value from spammy content, so the editing layer remains essential.

Nate: As someone who went to journalism school, I still value human editing. How do you balance writing for people versus for LLMs?

Ethan: We tell clients to separate their site structure. Keep your thoughtful, human-centered writing in a Blog, and your high-volume, AI-facing content in a Resources or Learning Center. That separation keeps your site clean, both human readers and LLMs get what they need.

Your best essays go in the blog. Your “Top 10 B2B Venture Firms in Seattle” listicle, that belongs in Resources. Surprisingly, those pieces perform extremely well in generative search.

Nate: Once your content is out there, how do you control how models represent your brand?

Ethan: Branded search is crucial. People ask LLMs questions like “What does Ascend do?” or “What is Gauge?” It is better for the model to quote your site than a random third-party. So write feature pages that explicitly answer those questions, what you do, who you serve, why you exist. That ensures models pull accurate context directly from your domain.

The same goes for “alternatives to” searches. Write your own “alternatives to” article, even if it feels awkward. It is better to control that narrative yourself.

Patrick: Right. For branded queries, your own domain is almost always the top-cited source if you have written anything relevant. Feed models clear, updated content so they reflect the message you want.

Nate: How often should companies create or update content?

Ethan: As often as is practical. For small teams, writing nonstop is not realistic, but consistency matters. Every new or refreshed piece gives models a reason to reference you again. Prioritize quality over quantity.

Patrick: Think of it as two tracks: your blog is for thoughtful, human-written work, while your resources section is where you answer the internet’s recurring questions. Keep both fresh, and both audiences, human and machine, will keep engaging.

Nate: One founder asked about using Reddit or other social platforms to improve visibility. Still worth it?

Ethan: It can help, but it is indirect. Your Reddit post has to be in the exact thread the model references, and even then your comment must be part of the cited context. It is three steps removed from influencing the final answer.

Publishing on your own site gives you immediate control and measurable impact. Once that is solid, branching out to Reddit, Dev.to, or LinkedIn can add incremental reach, but do not skip the foundation.

Patrick: GEO is still new, but one principle stands out: clarity and freshness win. You cannot game LLMs the way people gamed SEO, but you can teach them.

Ethan: Exactly. Think of it as building your brand’s knowledge graph for the AI era. The companies that start early, writing clear, structured, up-to-date content, will shape how they are represented in every generative engine.

Tags Generative Engine Optimization, GEO, Startup GEO, Gauge, Gumshoe AI, Ethan Finkel

Investing in Hearvana

November 5, 2025

Today we are excited to announce our investment in Hearvana, the acoustic layer for personalized intelligence. The company raised a $6 million round with participation from Point72, the AI2 Incubator, Amazon Alexa, and SBI Investments. 

Audio remains one of the most important and least developed interfaces for AI. Most devices treat sound as a simple input channel and struggle in real-world conditions. Noise cancellation suppresses everything. Voice assistants fail when the environment gets loud. Smart glasses and ambient agents depend on accurate context but cannot reliably detect or separate the conversations happening around the user. The gap between what people expect from natural audio interaction and what current hardware can deliver grows more obvious each year.

Hearvana’s technology creates programmable sound bubbles that allow users to focus on selected voices and filter out surrounding noise, which goes beyond noise cancellation. The company demoed real-time neural networks that run on embedded CPUs and separate voices based on distance, phase, and multi-channel audio features. The system processes 8 millisecond audio chunks with total latency under 10 milliseconds, which preserves lip sync, supports spatial alignment, and enables on-device AI that reacts quickly and consistently. 

The result, if successful, is an acoustic foundation that can support the next wave of human-computer interaction. Hearvana plans to develop an SDK that integrates into headphones, hearables, hearing aids, and AR glasses. This enables, for instance, recording of only the voice of a conversation partner in a noisy restaurant. It can transcribe a multi-party discussion and highlight missed dialogue. It can act as an in-ear assistant during meetings. It can also power real-time selective listening for people with hearing loss. These capabilities create value across consumer audio, enterprise communication, health, accessibility, and emerging spatial computing platforms. 

The founding team is one of the strongest we have seen in applied audio AI. CEO Shyam Gollakota spent more than 12 years as a professor at the University of Washington where he invented breakthrough acoustic systems. He previously co-founded Sound Life Sciences, which secured FDA 510(k) clearance for its respiratory monitoring app before being acquired by Google. Co-founder Malek Itani spent four years as a researcher at the University of Washington and authored the first open-source speech AI paper for wireless earbuds. Co-founder Tuochao Chen developed sound AI at Meta and Google and holds a PhD in computer science from the University of Washington. Three of the five authors of the Nature Electronics paper on sound bubbles are part of the founding team. 

Hearables represent a global $40 billion category with strong growth. Hearing aids generate $8 billion annually with customers who pay premiums for enhanced clarity. More than 1.5 billion people worldwide experience some level of hearing loss. AI assistants and smart glasses depend on accurate real-world audio capture and fail without it. 

Competition is increasing but remains fragmented. Traditional players like Phonak and newer entrants like Google are embedding AI accelerators into earbuds and hearing aids. Syntiant has raised more than $121 million to run low-power audio models on custom silicon. Hearvana differentiates by offering a hardware-agnostic, edge-optimized model that already runs at roughly 4.7 GOPS on commodity boards like Raspberry Pi. This means customers do not need custom chips to benefit from advanced selective listening. The academic depth of the team gives Hearvana a lead in model design. The early industry validation signals that their approach translates beyond the lab. The company also focuses on real-world constraints such as power budgets, latency limits, and multi-channel alignment, which positions the platform well for both consumer and medical-grade deployments. 

We invested because Hearvana is building the acoustic intelligence layer that modern AI systems need. The company combines foundational research, tight engineering, and practical efficiency on constrained hardware. 

We are proud to back the Hearvana team from day one.

Read more about the round from Axios.

Tags Hearvana

Investing in Hyphen

October 26, 2025

By: Nate Bek & Kirby Winfield

Today we’re excited to announce our investment in Hyphen AI, the AI-powered developer platform for access management and cloud resources. Unlock Ventures led the $5 million seed round, joined by Ascend.

Talk to any backend engineer and they’ll tell you that modern infrastructure automation takes too long and involves too many moving parts. 

Setting up secure access and deployment workflows across AWS, GCP, or Azure can take weeks of YAML files, Dockerfiles, and Terraform templates before a product is even live. Even with modern DevOps tools, these engineers spend hours maintaining configurations, updating dependencies, and enforcing policies by hand.

Hyphen is working to eliminate that overhead. Its new platform, Deploy, automates cloud deployment workflows without the need for human-authored infrastructure code. Developers describe what they want in business terms such as availability, latency, scale, or compliance. The system translates that intent into production-grade infrastructure. It builds and configures containers, provisions load balancers, enforces policies, and deploys to any cloud provider in minutes.

The company is led by Jared Wray and Alex Terry, who previously worked together at Palmetto. Jared co-founded Palmetto and served as CTO, helping the company scale its clean energy logistics platform to more than $1 billion raised. Alex served as an engineering director there, leading teams that built and operated distributed systems. Together they bring deep experience in large-scale infrastructure and automation.

The team has spent months working with design partners to refine their system and validate the use cases. The result is a developer-first platform that removes configuration sprawl and replaces it with policy-driven automation. They are already building toward an agentic layer that can optimize workloads in real time based on performance, scale, and cost.

This fits squarely within our SaaS 3.0 thesis: software that uses AI to replace high-friction workflows with measurable, automated outcomes. Hyphen abstracts away the manual work of infrastructure-as-code and gives engineers time back to build products instead of maintaining scaffolding.

The DevOps landscape remains fragmented. Tools like Kubernetes, Terraform, and Helm each solve narrow parts of the problem and require constant human coordination. Even with AI copilots, engineers still have to write and maintain code for infrastructure that rarely changes. Hyphen replaces this complexity with an intelligent system that interprets intent and enforces best practices automatically.

Key technical advantages include zero-config infrastructure-as-code that compiles full deployments automatically, policy-driven guardrails that maintain compliance across environments, multi-cloud support spanning AWS, GCP, Azure, and Cloudflare, and git-to-container automation that builds, hardens, and deploys apps directly from source.

Infrastructure remains one of the most expensive and time-consuming layers in software development. Hyphen is building an intelligent platform that simplifies and secures that layer through automation. 

We’re proud to back Jared, Alex, and the Hyphen team from day one. 

Tags Hyphen AI, Hyphen Funding, Ascend

Metro Multiples: A ranking of top startup ecosystems by return on investment

July 28, 2025

By: Nate Bek

If you handed me a dollar to invest in a startup, three metros would give me the best shot at returning $10: the Bay Area, Boston, and Seattle.

An Ascend analysis of venture capital efficiency across major U.S. cities reveals that while Silicon Valley maintains its lead in generating returns, Boston and Seattle are closing the gap with strong performance on smaller capital bases. The findings suggest that investors may be overlooking high-performing emerging markets in favor of legacy tech hubs.

The Bay Area leads with a Multiple on Invested Capital, or MOIC, of 10.07. Boston follows at 7.89. The biggest surprise? Seattle, long viewed as a second tier ecosystem, lands third with a MOIC of 7.48.

MOIC, the core metric in this study, divides total exit value by total venture capital invested. It captures actual returns through IPOs and acquisitions, removing the influence of inflated private valuations or unrealized marks. The data includes tech and biotech exits over $100 million between 2000 and mid-2025.

Silicon Valley companies raised more than $200 billion in that time and generated over $2 trillion in exit value. The region’s $2.56 billion average exit was lifted by several outliers, including Meta’s $104 billion IPO in 2012.

Boston startups raised $59.3 billion and delivered $467.5 billion in exits. Seattle companies attracted just $25.1 billion in investment and returned $187.6 billion. Despite its lower volume, Seattle’s average exit — $1.63 billion — was higher than Boston’s and second only to the Bay Area. Its largest deal was Pfizer’s $43 billion acquisition of Seagen.

(Hover over the regions to get their MOIC numbers compared to exit value. Read our methodology below.)

Both Boston and Seattle reflect the long-term advantages of regional specialization. In Boston, life sciences dominate. Proximity to research institutions, regulatory experience, and a deep bench of clinical operators have fueled a steady stream of biotech exits. The $39 billion sale of Alexion Pharmaceuticals to AstraZeneca remains among the largest.

Seattle’s strength lies in enterprise infrastructure. Microsoft and Amazon seeded a generation of engineering talent, much of it concentrated in cloud computing, dev tools, and AI systems. 

San Diego ranked fourth, with a MOIC of 6.95. The metro raised $17.4 billion and produced $120.9 billion in exits. Its biotech sector follows a familiar pattern: fewer bets, longer time horizons, and outsized returns when drugs reach market. 

New York placed fifth at 6.56, on $70.1 billion invested. Its strength in fintech and enterprise software produced consistent returns, though its average exit was smaller.

The remaining metros performed at a lower tier. Washington, D.C. posted a 4.41 MOIC, shaped by government services and defense technologies. Chicago and Los Angeles returned just over 4. Austin, despite its profile as an emerging tech hub, posted 2.62. Miami finished last at 1.79.

The results reveal persistent disparities in capital efficiency. Some of the country’s fastest-growing markets still lag in outcomes, while quieter cities convert dollars with precision. These differences matter more in a constrained funding environment, as LPs push for clarity on where capital is working hardest.

The industry has long favored concentration. Much of that remains rational. Silicon Valley still has unmatched density and depth. But the data suggests the gap is not as wide as capital flows imply. Cities like Boston and Seattle have outperformed on a relative basis for years, and with far less capital in play.

Venture returns are nonlinear. One company can change the trajectory of a hub. But ecosystems that consistently generate high-efficiency outcomes tend to have more than luck on their side. They have technical lineage, operator networks, and capital discipline. Those ingredients don’t guarantee success, but they give each dollar a better chance.

If the goal is to turn one dollar into ten, a few places are doing it better than most. That should inform how money moves next.

If you are looking to get the raw data, contact the head of CB Insights jason.saltzman@cbinsights.com. Thomas Stahura contributed to this report.


Methodology

This analysis was conducted to assess capital efficiency across selected U.S. startup ecosystems. Specifically, we sought to estimate where venture capital investment has historically yielded the highest return in terms of exit value.

To do so, we constructed a custom dataset of U.S.-based, venture-backed startup exits with disclosed or estimated values of at least $100 million, covering the period from January 1, 2000, through June 30, 2025. The principal metric used was MOIC (Multiple on Invested Capital), calculated as the ratio of total exit value to total known venture capital raised for each company.

The initial dataset was sourced from CB Insights, which provided foundational exit data. We supplemented this dataset using a web browser automation tool to extract additional information from publicly available sources, including press releases, SEC filings, media reports, and corporate websites. Where automation proved insufficient, we conducted manual enrichment and verification. This process included spreadsheet review, data cleaning, and, in some cases, direct outreach.

We excluded transactions involving non-technology companies. For example, companies in categories such as food and beverage, real estate, or hospitality were removed, even if they appeared in the raw dataset. All companies included had to meet two criteria: (1) the company must have raised verifiable venture capital prior to exit; and (2) the company must have exited via acquisition, public offering, or other liquidity event with a disclosed or credibly estimated value of at least $100 million.

Private equity–backed companies, spinouts, and founder-owned businesses were excluded unless we identified credible evidence of venture capital participation.

We created our own metro area categorization, loosely informed by Startup Genome's global ecosystem rankings. Ten metro areas were selected for inclusion. We made a discretionary decision to include Austin and to exclude Philadelphia, with the intent of focusing on the most active and publicly visible startup hubs. We acknowledge this selection introduces subjectivity into the dataset’s geographic framework.

Biases and Limitations

The authors of this analysis are based in Seattle, Washington, and maintain professional networks concentrated in the Pacific Northwest region. One author is a former technology journalist with enhanced access to local records and contacts. This may have resulted in higher data completeness for Seattle-based companies, including additional exit events and more precise investment totals not reflected in the original CB Insights dataset.

Although we attempted to apply consistent standards across all regions, the availability of region-specific information varied, and our local knowledge likely influenced the dataset composition. This may have introduced a slight bias in favor of Seattle-related data volume and completeness.

This was a two-person project conducted without institutional resources. Data collection and validation occurred over a period of approximately three months, using both automated and manual methods. While extensive effort was made to ensure accuracy, the dataset is not comprehensive, and some exits or funding amounts may have been omitted or misclassified.

This analysis is presented for informational purposes only. It should not be relied upon for investment decisions or used as the sole basis for assessing regional venture capital performance.

Tags Ascend, Venture Capital

Mapping Cascadian Dynamism

June 30, 2025

It’s hard to label what’s forming across the Pacific Northwest.

These companies don’t fit neatly into a single category. Some are building tactical autonomy, others are advancing compact fusion, modernizing satellite operations, deploying AI-driven robotics, or hardening energy systems. The connective tissue is regional: they’re born out of Cascadia’s unique access to technical talent, physical infrastructure, research depth, and enterprise buyers.

We call this Cascadian Dynamism.

The geography offers structural advantages. Port cities like Seattle and Vancouver provide direct access to logistics, aerospace, and maritime operations. Off-road testing environments are close. The presence of long-range RF labs, defense contractors, space manufacturers, and datacenter operators provides a natural customer base for emerging dual-use and industrial AI startups.

Founders consistently point to the talent layer as the defining factor. Boeing, Amazon, and Microsoft have produced decades of systems engineers, autonomy experts, and cloud infrastructure leads. The Allen Institute for AI, Nvidia’s robotics research, and the University of Washington contribute a steady stream of researchers with deep experience in machine learning, simulation, and computer vision. Fusion and battery chemistry are also heavily concentrated here, with companies like Helion, Zap Energy, Group14, and Sila hiring from a deep regional pool.

Several founders have said, privately and publicly, that this is the only region where their company could be built. It's one of the few places where technical hires understand both AI and physical systems, and where early customers are located within driving distance. The region’s proximity to major datacenter builds, energy utilities, and maritime operations gives startups live environments to test and deploy. Defense buyers and energy procurement teams are actively engaging with startups at earlier stages.

The satellite supply chain is another anchor. Washington produces over half the satellites currently in orbit, thanks to longstanding aerospace manufacturing expertise and a dense network of suppliers. Startups like Starfish, Quindar, and Kymeta are building on that foundation to reimagine in-orbit servicing, control systems, and communications. Robotics startups like Agility are taking advantage of Amazon’s massive warehouse footprint to design and iterate on deployable automation. Other startups are working with research vessels, agricultural testing zones, and off-grid energy projects that would be hard to replicate elsewhere.

Capital is starting to follow the talent. While historically undercapitalized compared to enterprise software, this sector is seeing strong inbound interest. Breakthrough Energy Ventures, Point72, and FUSE are based here. DIU Energy has a foothold in the region. New firms like Conduit and Actuate are being formed around the thesis that complex physical infrastructure is overdue for replatforming —and that Cascadia is one of the few places where that replatforming is already underway.

At Ascend, we have made several investments in this category (four highlighted in the market map), and are on the hunt for more. We call it Frontier AI, or Ai solving the physical world’s hardest problems.

But most of these companies won’t show up in standard SaaS deal flow. Many are operating in stealth, emerging from DARPA projects, research institutes, and spinouts from primes. But the pattern is becoming harder to ignore: engineering-heavy teams, access to buyers, defensible technology, and early federal traction.

There’s a real market taking shape here — one that doesn’t need to chase the latest API trends to build lasting value.

Tags Cascadian Dynamism, Seattle AI Market Map
Older Posts →

FEATURED

Featured
Attention is the Moat.jpg
LinkedIn Is the New Enterprise Media
How Startups Are Rethinking Hiring
How Startups Are Rethinking Hiring
THE GEO ADVANTAGE FOR STARTUPS.jpg
How startups should think about Generative Engine Optimization
Metro Multiples: A ranking of top startup ecosystems by return on investment
Metro Multiples: A ranking of top startup ecosystems by return on investment
Mapping Cascadian Dynamism
Mapping Cascadian Dynamism
Subscribe to Token Talk
Subscribe to Token Talk
You Let AI Help Build Your Product. Can You Still Own It?
You Let AI Help Build Your Product. Can You Still Own It?
Startup-Comp (1).jpg
Early-Stage Hiring, Decoded: What 60 Seattle Startups Told Us
Booming: An Inside Look at Seattle's AI Startup Scene
Booming: An Inside Look at Seattle's AI Startup Scene
SEATTLE AI MARKET MAP V2 - EDITED (V4).jpg
Mapping Seattle's Enterprise AI Startups
Our 2025 Predictions: AI, space policy, and hoverboards
Our 2025 Predictions: AI, space policy, and hoverboards
Mapping Seattle's Active Venture Firms
Mapping Seattle's Active Venture Firms
VC for the rest of us: A big tech employee’s guide to becoming startup advisors
VC for the rest of us: A big tech employee’s guide to becoming startup advisors
Valley VCs.jpg
Event Recap: Valley VCs Love Seattle Startups
VC for the rest of us: The ultimate guide to investing in venture capital funds for tech employees
VC for the rest of us: The ultimate guide to investing in venture capital funds for tech employees
Seattle VC Firms Led Just 11% of Early-Stage Funding Rounds in 2023
Seattle VC Firms Led Just 11% of Early-Stage Funding Rounds in 2023
Seattle AI Market Map (1).jpg
Mapping the Emerald City’s Growing AI Dominance
SaaS 3.0: Why the Software Business Model Will Continue to Thrive in the Age of In-House AI Development
SaaS 3.0: Why the Software Business Model Will Continue to Thrive in the Age of In-House AI Development
3b47f6bc-a54c-4cf3-889d-4a5faa9583e9.png
Best Practices for Requesting Warm Intros From Your Investors
 

Powered by Squarespace