4 ms·
It's easy to choose an arbitrary timescale to fit a viewpoint. The author chose a massive timescale from 2002 to 2014 (presenting it as if that period of activi
by askafriend 7y ago
It's easy to choose an arbitrary timescale to fit a viewpoint. The author chose a massive timescale from 2002 to 2014 (presenting it as if that period of activity were simply unremarkable) - and then made a bold, unsubstantiated claim. I'm not going to give the author any more wiggle room, sorry.
I listed multiple BILLION dollar opportunities created in the just the past few years during the tail end of that author's range. I think this shows that the author's argument is weak at best and completely unsubstantiated at worst.
The ones founded in 2016/2017 haven't had time to mature yet. I suspect we'll see more breakouts hit ~$1B valuations soon enough.
But sure I'll give you examples:
* Brex was founded in 2017 and is now worth $2B.
* Whatever you think of scooter companies, Lime and Bird were both founded in 2017, and are now $1B+ companies.
* Nuro was founded in 2016 and is a $2.7B+ company.
- hn_throwaway_99 7y agoI agree with your overall viewpoint, that the timeframe is pretty arbitrary. And after all, it's kind of a catch 22 to say "It's going to take a lot more effort to become a billion dollar company now" and then in the same breath say "Aha, see, no billion dollar companies from the past 3-4 years." At the same time, I strongly caution interpreting any VC-funding-round-extrapolated-total-valuation as a true valuation.
- jjeaff 7y agoVC valuations are based on what they estimate they can pump a company up to before dumping it on the open market. Not on the value or long term viability of the company.