2 ms·
My instinct tells me that this is a much better outcome for founders and many employees than “unicorns”. It’s possibly not as good an outcome for investors, an
by xevb3k 8y ago
My instinct tells me that this is a much better outcome for founders and many employees than “unicorns”.
It’s possibly not as good an outcome for investors, and they might actually view this as a bad exit.
Am I wrong? Would most investors be pretty happy with this? Would most founders/employees be better of going for creating a unicorn?
- keithwhor 8y agoGiven that Cluep is Canadian, I would expect the $500k they raised to be on a $2M Cap convertible note or some similarly valued instrument. That's totally a guess, btw. They could've sold way more or way less of their company. But, ballparking here. So, ~20x return over 6 years for investors that are likely non-institutional. In short -- it's probably a very good deal for Angels. That's about a 65% YoY compounded return. It's likely that outside of the founders nobody is going to retire, but that's OK. It's only when deep institutional pockets get involved that <$100M exits are considered "weak."
- xevb3k 8y agoFor Angels but what about seed funding? YCombinator/Other incubators?
- keithwhor 8y agoThere's likely not much if any institutional money involved in a $500k raise. If there was, then it's not as great of an outcome, but to an institutional investor this would likely just have been a "let's see what happens" check -- which makes it pretty good regardless.