Uhm. 50% actually seems quite conservative. If you have no data, the probability halves with each concurrent requirement. If Angels invested, on average, in two

Uhm. 50% actually seems quite conservative. If you have no data, the probability halves with each concurrent requirement. If Angels invested, on average, in two start ups a year, looking at the issue with no data, you'd expect 75% of them to regret at least one of their investments. If they invested in four you'd expect 93.75% of them to regret. According to Almeida Capital Research, as cited by the DTI, the average number of annual investments by angel-backed funds in the UK is 6.5 http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file38273.pdf http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file38273.pdf (see page 47) Granted the UK is not the US, granted that angel-backed funds isn't necessarily the same as saying that each Angel made 6.5 investments. Still, if those numbers are even vaguely in the right ballpark, that's a lot of uncertainty being reduced to get down to 50% regret. And then, is their regret rational, do they only regret things on which they've lost money, and how much? If you make 80% of your income from 20% of your projects (I don't know the actual numbers) and you regret on average > 15.38% of your investments you may well be able to take on a fair bit more risk. > Investors would basically prefer if entrepreneurs didn’t blow a lot of hot air. Considering that angel-funded startups are significantly more likely to survive at least four years and raise additional financing, its in entrepreneurs’ best interest to be honest and back their claims up with real information. If they gave an honest valuation maybe they wouldn't get funded at all. The motivation of an entrepreneur is not necessarily to reduce investor regret.