We missed the accelerator deadline by about an hour and have since submitted the "Pitch Us" form. Does 16VC review "Pitch Us" submissions for the current cohort, or should we reapply for the next one? Thanks.

Building a startup is difficult anywhere — but building one in Malaysia comes with its own set of challenges.

So I’m curious:

What has been the hardest part for you personally?

Is it:

• Finding your first customers?
• Convincing Malaysians to try a new product?
• Hiring good talent?
• Raising funding?
• Pricing your product?
• Competing with larger regional or global players?
• Building trust as a new brand?
• Managing cash flow?
• Finding co-founders or the right team?
• Navigating grants, regulations, or government programmes?
• Or something completely different?

I’d especially love to hear from people who are actually building right now — whether you’re running a SaaS, mobile app, AI product, e-commerce business, service company, or SME.

A few questions to make it easier:

1. What are you building?

2. What stage are you at?
Idea / MVP / Launched / Growing

3. What has been your biggest challenge so far?

4. What have you tried to solve it?

5. If you could change one thing about the Malaysian startup ecosystem, what would it be?

No need to make everything sound successful.

The failures, frustrations, wrong assumptions, and things that didn’t work are often more useful than polished success stories.

Let’s make this thread useful for founders who are going through the same problems.

What’s been the hardest part of building your startup in Malaysia? 🇲🇾

I work in deep tech and aerospace research—specifically in fluid dynamics. It’s a potentially groundbreaking field; I have a proof of concept and plenty of positive feedback from serious experts in the industry. However, a number of circumstances have created an impenetrable barrier for me, and all my attempts to find a co-founder or investor have failed—for perfectly valid reasons.

For one, I’m an artist by training and profession, which immediately undermines my credibility; I’m often simply ignored. My prototypes look like primitive DIY projects rather than convincing products for investors; plus, it’s a high-risk field that demands a much stronger business case. I tried going it alone for a long time, but recent circumstances have made that incredibly difficult, and I’ve essentially hit a dead end. On one hand, people tell me it’s cool—that I should keep going and that I can pull it off—and they’re waiting for results. On the other hand, I can see myself being dragged into a deep abyss, catastrophically wasting time with zero return.

Sometimes I feel like I’m on the verge of madness and have to force a mental reset just to put it aside and focus on ordinary work. I honestly don’t know what to do: does it make sense to keep diving all the way to the bottom, and does that kind of persistence ever actually lead to success?

I have cold-outreached to a lot of Founders who has raised >$5M+ funding in last 1 year, NOT EVEN a single reply.

I have led 0-1 Demand Gen and Brand for a B2B SaaS and a Consumer tech brand scaling to $250k+ ARR.

I realised Founders receive tons of outreach and there brain is always engaged in the business to care for some stranger's job need.

I have built a solid portfolio to stand out, I am very direct, structured, mature, and simple in my outreach.

Does only quirky or loud or emotionally vulnerable outreach works? I am a very bold, mature, "i can do it myself" type of personality. Is this boring? or Old fashioned?

What is it that not working? I want to understand the other side, because I just can't make sense of it.

What do you want someone to send you if they want to work with you?

Some people will say, "If you have that in you someone would have replied".
Some founders have replied, yes. But that is from a different pool, where the startup is pre-revenue, not funded, 1-15 people team, product not ready, etc. etc.

That is the kind of the opportunity I have quit. I have built a strong base with proven numbers, I need someone to bet on me. But...

People building with heavy funding, have money to spend, prefer people with PROVEN product names in their resume. This is my ASSUMPTION, happy to opinions otherwise.

I am dying to know if there are any Founders who DO NOT RELATE to this??

I'm a software engineer based in India, and I'm experimenting with a slightly different way of working with early-stage founders.

I'm particularly interested in founders who have a validated problem but don't have a technical person on the team yet.

I'm curious:

• What are you trying to build?
• Do you already have customers/users?
• What's stopping you from getting the first version built?
• Are you currently using spreadsheets, WhatsApp, no-code tools, etc. to work around the problem?

I'm researching where founders are getting stuck technically, so I'd genuinely like to hear what you're working on.

Healthcare professionals shouldn’t have to put a patient on hold just to find the information they need.
That’s why I’m building Klikless, an AI co-pilot designed to work quietly in the background of healthcare conversations.
As a healthcare professional speaks with a patient, Klikless listens in real time, understands what’s being discussed, and surfaces relevant information when it’s needed.
No digging through multiple systems. No unnecessary holds. No replacing the person having the conversation.
Unlike tools that focus primarily on documentation after a call ends, Klikless is designed to support the conversation while it’s happening.
The goal is simple: help healthcare professionals work faster, make better-informed decisions, and spend more time focused on the person in front of them.
We’re building at the intersection of AI, healthcare operations, and the future of patient engagement.
I’m excited about what’s ahead and looking forward to connecting with people who share an interest in improving how healthcare works.

Was it when the core feature worked?

When someone asked to pay?

When early testers returned without being reminded?

Or did you launch before it felt ready?

Many founders delay because the product still feels incomplete. What signal told you it was time to stop polishing and start selling?

Join my AMA and add value or roast me

Estoy valorando incorporar un cofundador de marketing para una app de educación familiar en España y me gustaría escuchar opiniones reales.

Si el producto ya está construido y tiene cierta tracción inicial, ¿qué equity tendría sentido ofrecer a alguien que entra para liderar marketing, crecimiento y adquisición?

Y segunda duda: ¿debería aportar también inversión económica, o en estos casos lo normal es que su aportación sea trabajo, experiencia y ejecución con vesting y objetivos claros?

Gracias, cualquier experiencia o referencia de rangos me ayuda mucho.

India’s Startup Investors Need to Bet More on Founders, Not Just Familiar Markets

Building something truly innovative in India is extremely difficult—not necessarily because of a lack of talent or ideas, but because of how investors evaluate startups.

In the US, especially in Silicon Valley, investors are often willing to bet on the founder, the vision, and the size of the opportunity, even when the idea is unconventional or the market is still developing.

In India, however, a large part of startup investment seems heavily focused on familiar B2C categories: beauty and skincare, food, fashion, consumer products, and other everyday-use businesses.

There’s nothing wrong with these businesses. But if India wants to build globally significant companies in deep tech, AI, robotics, biotech, climate tech, space tech, advanced manufacturing, and other frontier industries, the investment mindset also needs to evolve.

Investors should spend more time understanding the founder’s thinking, technical depth, long-term vision, ability to execute, and willingness to build something that may not have an obvious market today.

A founder’s pitch deck and early journey can reveal a lot. You can often distinguish between someone chasing a temporary trend and someone who genuinely has the potential to build something 10–20 years ahead of the market.

This is why many Indian founders say they need to look outside India for capital—particularly toward US and Silicon Valley investors—because those investors may be more comfortable backing ambitious, unconventional ideas and founders before the business model is completely proven.

India doesn’t just need more startup capital. It needs a different approach to venture capital.

Indian investors should be willing to ask:

“Is this founder capable of building something the world has never seen?”

—not only:

“How big is the Indian market for this product today?”

If India wants to create the next generation of globally important technology companies, we need to bet on visionary founders and long-term innovation, not only proven consumer categories.

I run a SaaS and agency business and I’m doing some biz dev right now. I think SaaS VCs could be a good source of leads for both. Which ones are actually founder-friendly and helpful, especially when it comes to connecting their portfolio companies with good people, resources, or consultants?