3 ms·
So some VCs didn't get the crazy high returns they thought they would. So what? Calling Trello a failed outcome is still crazy. There are far, far more metrics
by st3v3r 10y ago
So some VCs didn't get the crazy high returns they thought they would. So what? Calling Trello a failed outcome is still crazy.
There are far, far more metrics, and I'd say far more important metrics to decide whether a company is a success than the amount of VC returns.
- jasode 10y ago>Calling Trello a failed outcome is still crazy. Please read my previous comment charitably as I deliberately wrote about Trello using the "investment perspective" for discussion purposes only. It wasn't rendering absolutist judgement that Trello was a failed company. >So some VCs didn't get the crazy high returns That's only looking at one side. The other side is J Spolsky who accepted the $10m. To do that, he had to believe Trello would grow beyond $1 billion and convince outside investors of that same vision. If a founder makes a decision to accept VC money, he has redefined the threshold of what success/failure will be. The math makes that unavoidable.
- st3v3r 10y agoI cannot agree with that. Taking $10m does not mean you plan on growing into a $1B business. I also disagree with the idea that we have to focus on the "investment perspective". The VCs made money. I can't care less that they didn't make as much as they wanted to.
- rhizome 10y agoWhat is the basis for a $10M investment implying a $1B expectation?