> As of now, few of the startups that take money from super-angels are ruling out taking VC money. They're just postponing it. But that's still a problem for VC

> As of now, few of the startups that take money from super-angels are ruling out taking VC money. They're just postponing it. But that's still a problem for VCs. Some of the startups that postpone raising VC money may do so well on the angel money they raise that they never bother to raise more. I'm excited that this is the case. The way I see it, a small, focused group of people can get an extraordinary amount of good work done in a short period. The constraints of lean funding, to the tune of the $600,000 Paul describes, seem like the perfect way to keep focused for the first couple of years. Maybe they're an aberration, but my hat is off to 280 North for pursuing just this strategy. Raise a bit of cash, work hard, build cool stuff, stay focused. They got quite an exit out of it, (from any reasonable founder's perspective) but that's almost beside the point that they got to do their own thing without outside meddling. But maybe there are war stories I should hear before I commit to that position. As soon as someone is shoving several million dollars into your pockets, they're also commanding you to spend it, which always seems to mean hiring people, bloating your team and throttling your momentum. (see Digg vs. Reddit) That sounds terrible. It also lets you delay figuring out how your company is going to actually generate some money one day, which strikes me as counterproductive. I'd rather retain a nimble position. Communication is easy, focus is non-negotiable.