3 ms·
That would probably just lead to "Nos" instead of "contingent Yeses" (which really are pretty good if you think about it). It's not like these investors are bac
by pbreit 13y ago
That would probably just lead to "Nos" instead of "contingent Yeses" (which really are pretty good if you think about it). It's not like these investors are backing out.
- nostrademons 13y agoA "no" is significantly better than a "contingent yes", because it lets you move in and focus your time and energy on getting a real yes.
- pbreit 13y agoBut a "contingent yes" is a "yes". Totally disagree that a "no" is better.
- nostrademons 13y agoIt's often not, though. That's what this whole thread is about. Usually when investors waffle it's because they aren't going to commit anyway; they may think that they should and at one level want to, but their fear gets the best of them.
- pbreit 13y agoMaybe we're not talking about the same thing. A "contingent yes" is completely different from a "maybe". The rug guys were the "contingent yes", Google Ventures was the "maybe". Suggesting "A "no" is significantly better than a "contingent yes"" is bizarre.