3 ms·
I agree 100%. VCs give money to risky companies so that they can aim for very high growth. If the growth expectations aren't 50% per year or higher, the VCs w
by mathattack 10y ago
I agree 100%.
VCs give money to risky companies so that they can aim for very high growth. If the growth expectations aren't 50% per year or higher, the VCs won't invest. Some won't invest if they don't see an option for getting 100x on the other end. They do this having promised their investors to liquidate the fund after a fixed amount of years, usually 7-10. Everyone knows this going in.
It's both bold and responsible to bootstrap and not require VC funding. Just don't take VC money.
It's ok to hold off a year. It's not ok to say, "We're at a mature size, you can wait all you want."
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago> It's both bold and responsible to bootstrap and not require VC funding I think there's sense in the middle. VC funding is expensive. Use it to finance rapid growth across orders of magnitude. If you can't or don't want to grow like that, find a more appropriate funding source.
- gertef 10y agohaving one's cake and eating it is better than either alternative alone.
- draw_down 10y agoUnless you signed a contract that says you'll go to IPO, or they have some other means of coercion... sounds like boohoo for the VC.
- mathattack 10y agoThe VCs generally have board seats to force the issue. At some point employees want exits too. Only the strongest companies can ignore their money providers forever.