4 ms·

Just to be clear re: Mattermark Series A deck slide 12 it was a goal based on our growth rate at that time, not a prediction.

• 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
  First, I commend you for being so open about your company's finances. A lot of people don't really understand how venture-backed companies operate, so it's really helpful to have real-world examples. That said, it doesn't really matter whether you refer to your financial projections as projections, goals, etc. What I would observe is that the growth in revenue you targeted and presented to investors apparently has not materialized. At the same time, based on this[1], it appears your burn has doubled in less than a year, and your quarterly burn appears to be significantly higher than what you projected here[2]. This is a quintessential demonstration of what I wrote above: it's far easier to spend money in anticipation of growth than it is to actually grow revenues. I would add that it's usually doubly difficult for venture-backed companies to cut spending, even when it becomes clear it's the fiscally prudent thing to do, because it sends all sorts of negative signals to the investors you're going to be asking to continue buying into your growth story. [1] https://medium.com/@DanielleMorrill/is-my-startup-burn-rate-normal-882b2bd20f02 https://medium.com/@DanielleMorrill/is-my-startup-burn-rate-... [2] http://www.slideshare.net/DanielleMorrill/mattermark-1st-series-a-deck http://www.slideshare.net/DanielleMorrill/mattermark-1st-ser...