The reason I ask for three blocks of time is because the Investor is WAY BUSIER than I am. SO, in this scenario, I'm giving him the option to basically PICK what time works for him and I will 99% of the time go with the first one.
I also ask for TWO more so that we reduce on email back and forth.
Its all about 1) less emails and 2) accommodating the investor. If he or she is already looking at the calendar for ONE time that works, sureley TWO more is not that bad and it increases the chances of getting a mutual time that works.
I think the "less emails" is not nearly as important as making it as easy as possible for them to respond to you. The more work they have to do, the more likely they are to just ignore the email rather than reply. That's why I would either not say anything or just suggest general times (e.g. "Afternoons on Mondays and Tuesdays are best for me.")
The beauty of asking for multiple specific times is that the asker can then respond affirmatively to one of those specific times (likely to the respondent's first choice), and eliminate any additional email exchanges.
What? The person who works on perhaps seven deals over a five year investment cycle is 'way busier' than the person scratching to bring a new concept implementation to market as quickly as possible?
I think he meant "way busier" in the sense of "fewer times open for a meeting". To someone coding a lot, which time to meet is mostly unimportant, while to someone working out lots of deals there may not be many open slots to put a meeting in.
I also ask for TWO more so that we reduce on email back and forth.
Its all about 1) less emails and 2) accommodating the investor. If he or she is already looking at the calendar for ONE time that works, sureley TWO more is not that bad and it increases the chances of getting a mutual time that works.