3 ms·
You can't raise VC money and save it for a rainy day. If VCs wanted their money in a bank they'd just put it in a bank. If you raise $100M you have to put $100
by api 2y ago
You can't raise VC money and save it for a rainy day. If VCs wanted their money in a bank they'd just put it in a bank.
If you raise $100M you have to put $100M to work or you'll hear constant shit from your board over it.
If they raised $160M they're going to spend $160M on something. My guess would be a lot of enterprise features and product integrations.
- groby_b 2y agoThat depends entirely on how you raise the funds. Yes, you can say "Here's the growth rate we'd get without your money - based on that, this investment gets you an ROI of x%." With x% high enough, sure, you can get VC money without too many strings. (Also, reading the Series B post, they were planning to invest - just in organic growth instead of the usual growth hacking) And if you read the Series C post, you'd know what they're spending on - GPU (and general) cloud interconnectivity. There's really not much need to guess, Tailscale's financing announcements are about as open as you can get.
- pomatic 2y agoWhat is tailscale going to do with GPUs? It's about as far removed from NL interaction as you can get, I really don't see any sane AI fit. Maybe they are using them for AI driven dev work? Probably need to think more laterally.
- groby_b 2y agoRead. The. Fine. Article.
- yencabulator 1y agoThe fine article seems to say lots of companies are using Tailscale to connect to servers with GPUs -- nothing in that implies that Tailscale would own the GPUs.
- PLG88 1y agoI think you mean to say: The. fine. article. seems. to. say. lots. of. companies. are. using. Tailscale. to. connect. to. servers. with. GPUs. -- nothing. in. that. implies. that. Tailscale. would. own. the. GPUs. Besides my joke, you are bang on, nothing implies needing to buy GPUs and based on my knowledge of their product/the space, absolutely no reason to.
- mgfist 2y agoNot necessarily. You hear plenty of stories of companies who raised money they never ended up needing to touch. What matters is why. Is it because growth is so bonkers that your burn stays minimal/zero despite increasing costs? Or is it because you don't spend anything and thus can get by with stable revenue. VCs are very happy with the first, less so with the second. VCs would always prefer you get to megascale with less money - the less you raise, the less they get diluted.
- crmd 2y agoThank you. I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve had to write “we don’t need the money but are saving for a rainy day” CEO talking points and press releases for companies that were < 90 days from not being able to make payroll.
- ytpete 2y agoI guess technically they weren't lying, just holding back on disclosing that they already knew a rainy day was coming and it was coming very soon...
- crmd 2y agoIn my experience, many if not most tech executives don’t believe in the concept of truth vs lying. There are only “competing narratives.”
- Jommi 1y agothis is not true at all lmao of COURSE you can raise money and not use it.