← Home
This Week in Startups · May 20, 2026 · 1h 34m

Avi Patel on the startup that copied Kled and why he called out General Catalyst by name

Jason Calacanis and Alex examine Mercury's $200M funding round despite profitability, then pivot to Avi Patel's allegation that a competitor directly copied Kled's business model. Patel names General Catalyst as a backer of the copycat startup, prompting Calacanis to render verdicts on all parties—Mercury, Kled, the copycat, Y Combinator, and the venture firm. The episode closes with a news round covering OpenAI's $2M token credit program for startups.

This summary was generated from show notes and public descriptions, not from a full transcript review. Details may contain inaccuracies.

Highlights

OpenAI's $2M token credit program democratizes AI access for startups
OpenAI announced $2M in token credits available to hundreds of startups, reducing the barrier to building on AI infrastructure.

Editorial

Why raise $200M if you're already profitable?
Mercury raised $200M in new funding despite already being profitable—a decision that raises questions about capital efficiency and founder motives.
Y Combinator due diligence may be weak on competitive landscape
The copycat startup's Y Combinator affiliation, combined with its clear replication of an existing company's model, suggests YC may not be adequately evaluating whether companies are copying prior art in their space.
VC transparency about portfolio conflicts is nonexistent
Patel's public naming of General Catalyst highlights that founders almost never publicly call out VCs for backing competitors, suggesting a power imbalance that keeps conflicts hidden.

Contradicts

Direct IP copying is normalized in VC
Avi Patel alleges a competitor directly copied Kled's entire business model and feature set, backed by a tier-one VC firm, suggesting IP theft is tolerated or even incentivized in venture capital.

Misc

Patel willing to name General Catalyst publicly—rare move in VC transparency conversation
Tension between profitability (Mercury) and continued fundraising creates awkward dynamic
Y Combinator connection to copycat startup raises questions about due diligence
Copycat timing and feature parity suggest deliberate replication, not coincidence
Was this useful?