4 ms·
Lol. By all means, make fun of this strategy now, I do it myself, but you have to understand what it was like in silicon valley back in those days, 2010-2011. F
by mindgam3 7y ago
Lol. By all means, make fun of this strategy now, I do it myself, but you have to understand what it was like in silicon valley back in those days, 2010-2011. Facebook was the game in town, and these were the days when for the true believers, myself included, it was going to deliver us from evil (yeah, I know). The “smart money” either were Facebook insiders or wished they were, ie everyone knew that to insist on meaningful revenue before writing a seed stage check meant missing out on the next Facebook.
I was a first time founder who started out as a build engineer, then engineer, tech lead, and PM. I’d been bootstrapping for two years and needed to raise. I didn’t know shit about business or venture capital other than that it’s apparently how dreams get made. So I figured out how to position the company to get funded, and got it done.
Did I have a proven revenue model? No, but I had a few plausible directions, and that was enough to get to the next phase, so I didn’t sweat it.
Would I pitch a pre-revenue startup on Sand Hill in 2019? Unlikely.
Maybe that’s obvious to everyone now. But it’s a lot easier to be on the outside making fun of failed projects than to actually forego the cushy salary and go for it as a founder.
- username223 7y agoI wasn't commenting on the strategy (which I agree is less than great) as much as the language. "Pre-revenue" as a euphemism for "we're losing money," "play" as one for "likely-to-fail business," etc. I could have called it "VC jargon," but "bafflegab" seemed appropriate, or maybe "Newspeak." Still, thanks for the explanation. I'm just an outsider looking in.
- thoughtstheseus 7y agoPre-revenue is a widely accepted term to describe a company, and usually an accurate one.