← 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?