3 ms·

I've seen far worse, but if anything, this demonstrates just how far the Series A has fallen in today's market. A couple of examples: "Series A Financials" (sl

I've seen far worse, but if anything, this demonstrates just how far the Series A has fallen in today's market. A couple of examples: "Series A Financials" (slide 14) shows a lot of money going out, but doesn't detail how the founders think about money coming in. "Risk & Mitigations" (slide 16) is really lacking for a $10 million Series A raise, particularly one that involves setting up a new bank. "It takes longer to ship our software"/"speed up engineering hiring" is particularly amusing if you've been in software development for any length of time. "If we can't find the right people"/"work with headhunters and use contractors, as needed" will be equally amusing to anyone who has had to hire in today's market.

devanti 11y ago
I agree. It seemed more like an angel round deck. A startup asking for $10M series A should already product validation, meaningful traction, and starting their growth phase. This had none of that. The only thing they had going for them was YC and a strong brand of previous investors.
- 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
  To be fair to Standard Treasury, the pitch ("we're building a new kind of bank") is an unusual one for traditional technology investors, so product validation, traction, etc. are probably going to be less important to the investors who are interested in evaluating this further. But even so, the detail is quite lacking and there's not a lot that instills confidence that this company has what it takes break into a highly-regulated market dominated by institutions with billions of dollars in capital and more and better technology resources than the founders would like to believe. Building a viable new bank is not a $10 million proposition, so as an investor my first question would be: how much are you going to need to raise in the next several years for this to even have a shot?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

devanti 11y ago

I agree. It seemed more like an angel round deck. A startup asking for $10M series A should already product validation, meaningful traction, and starting their growth phase. This had none of that. The only thing they had going for them was YC and a strong brand of previous investors.

7Figures2Commas 11y ago
To be fair to Standard Treasury, the pitch ("we're building a new kind of bank") is an unusual one for traditional technology investors, so product validation, traction, etc. are probably going to be less important to the investors who are interested in evaluating this further. But even so, the detail is quite lacking and there's not a lot that instills confidence that this company has what it takes break into a highly-regulated market dominated by institutions with billions of dollars in capital and more and better technology resources than the founders would like to believe. Building a viable new bank is not a $10 million proposition, so as an investor my first question would be: how much are you going to need to raise in the next several years for this to even have a shot?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]