4 ms·
I’m at a point in life where gambling doesn’t appeal to me. I could take VC, earn a (temporary) steady salary, and then, having given up controlling interest in
by jagged-chisel 3y ago
I’m at a point in life where gambling doesn’t appeal to me. I could take VC, earn a (temporary) steady salary, and then, having given up controlling interest in my company, be at the back of the line for an exit while the VCs, who put no sweat equity into the company, get a huge payday.
Or, I can bootstrap, have less stability, all the control to hire just who I need and when … and less stress.
I’ve worked at two companies that took VC. In both cases, investors didn’t care about anything except whatever metric showed “growth” so they could exit larger than they entered - the tech didn’t matter, the team didn’t matter. Based on this sample size and so many stories from SV about how founders and employees are treated, I have a hard time seeing VCs as anything but leeches.
- notso411 3y ago[dead]
- wslh 3y agoObviously there is not an unique answer. My experience is the reverse of you, a bootstrapped startup was more stressful than one with investors because there is no magic money created but the one you receive from reality.
- VBprogrammer 3y agoI think taking VC money is great if you are in a capture the flag type market. Social networks, taxi market places etc. If it's something which has value with a modest number of customers, not a significant fraction of the addressable market, then maybe less so.