They absolutely wouldn't, and it makes sense for them not to. VCs make their money by funding the Facebooks and Googles of the world, not the Basecamps. From t

They absolutely wouldn't, and it makes sense for them not to. VCs make their money by funding the Facebooks and Googles of the world, not the Basecamps. From the perspective of the founder, Basecamp seems pretty great - multiple millions of dollars in profit a year, ability to live a comfortable lifestyle without waiting for an exit. From the perspective of a VC, it's a mess. Their fund isn't set up or really interested in dealing with dividends, they're built around the idea of an exit. Furthermore, given 100 companies, they'd much rather have 1 Google and 99 failed companies than 50 Basecamps and 50 failed companies. So adding risk by re-investing is always in the investor's interest. Finally, they have no leverage in a profitable company. The company doesn't need them anymore - VCs benefit quite a bit from holding the pursestrings.