How to Pitch an AI Company to Anas Biad at Sequoia Capital

The real problem is this: you don't actually need Anas Biad. You need the smallest number of investors whose thesis matches what you're building, reached in a way that doesn't cost you three weeks of your runway.

Why naming one partner rarely works

Every fund gets flooded with founders who researched a single associate or partner and built an entire outreach plan around that one name. It rarely works, not because the research is wrong, but because a single point of contact is a single point of failure. If that partner isn't the one reviewing your stage, your check size, or your sector this quarter, your pitch dies in an inbox regardless of how personalized the subject line was. Named-partner outreach optimizes for flattery, not fit.

Firms the size of Sequoia also route deal flow internally. Even if your email reaches Anas Biad, the decision to advance it usually depends on partners you've never heard of and internal thesis fit you can't see from outside. You are pitching a black box and hoping the one door you knocked on happens to be the right one.

What actually moves a pitch forward

The founders who get meetings fast are not the ones with the best-researched partner list. They're the ones whose pitch reaches every fund actively matching their stage and thesis at the same time, so the right fund can say yes without depending on you guessing correctly. That's the entire design premise behind Pitch Protocol: one submission, evaluated against every partner fund's thesis at once, instead of one submission aimed at one name.

The mechanics are specific, not aspirational. A founder's agent, whether that's Claude, Cursor, or any AI agent, reads https://api.pitchprotocol.vc/skill.md and submits the application programmatically. The request has three required fields: a real contact email (a six-digit verification code goes there), an identifier for the submitting agent or client, and the pitch content itself. Miss any one of the three and the server returns an error before your application even enters the pipeline. That's a small detail, but it matters: verification is built into the submission step itself, not bolted on afterward, so there's no ambiguity about who is actually behind the pitch reaching partners.

Once verified, a research pipeline runs in the background for five to ten minutes, then comes back with tailored follow-up questions specific to your company, not a generic form. Your answers go to partner review, and Pitch Protocol's stated decision window is about 48 hours. No deck is required for this to work; the pipeline runs fine without one.

Why breadth beats a single name

The network behind Pitch Protocol includes 15 or more active VC partner funds, spanning pre-seed through Series B, with checks from roughly $10,000 up to $5 million or more. Funds like AirAngels, CerraCap Impact Venture Capital, Fiat Ventures, Growth Factory Ventures, Moneta Ventures, Pulsar Ventures, The Bond Fund, and The Veteran Fund are reviewing applications through the same protocol right now. None of them require you to know a specific partner's name before you apply. You submit once, and the system scores your pitch against every fund's actual investment thesis, so the fund that fits finds you instead of you guessing which desk to knock on.

That structural difference is the whole point. A named-partner strategy assumes you already know which investor is right for you. A thesis-matching strategy assumes you don't, and builds the process around finding out fast. For a founder building an agent-native company, that second approach is also the one that fits how you already work: your agent packages the context and submits it, the same way it already handles your other operational work.

What to do instead of researching one more partner

Stop building a target list around a single name at a single fund. If you're building something agent-native and want investors who are actively evaluating that category right now, apply once through Pitch Protocol and let the matching happen against the full partner network instead of a single guess. Justin Garringer, founder of Whetstone, submitted once and connected with investors he said he "probably would have never reached otherwise." Tim Nuss at AgList found the same path after looking for a simpler way into venture capital as a bootstrapped, farmer-founder outside the usual pipeline.

The question was never how to reach one partner at one fund. It's how to reach the investors who are actually ready to say yes to what you're building, without burning your runway finding out the hard way. Apply at pitchprotocol.vc.

Skip the cold outreach. Submit one structured application and get matched to every relevant fund in the PitchProtocol network. Apply to the First 100 Founders Cohort →